Bring a 100-400f/4.5-5.6L IS II or a 70-200f/4L IS to Paris?

Pietro Marchesi wrote:

Is it worth it to bring a 100-400f/4.5-5.6L IS II instead of a 70-200f/4L IS for a 9 day family vacation to Paris, Versailles and Disneyland Paris?

Obviously the 100-400f/4.5-5.6L IS II is larger and twice the weight of my 70-200f/4L IS. What will I gain having easy access to twice the focal length in Paris?

I use a 6D and will also bring my 24-70f/2.8L II and 16-35f/4L IS. My wife will use her small Sony RX100III and and our son his Panasonic LX7. We all enjoy taking a lot of photos.

I always bring 6D + 24-70f/2.8L II as my main lens everywhere I go, always ready to shoot never in a bag. i find 24-70f/2.8L I is perfect for most family/people shots and I almost always also bring my 16-35f/4L IS and 70-200f/4L IS in a small rucksack for when I need a wider or a longer lens.

On our latest trips to Istanbul, Rome and New York my most used lens was my 24-70f/2.8L II but the 16-35f/4L IS has been invaluable, especially useful indoors in museums and large churches.

On these trips my second most used lens was as always my beloved 70-200f/4L IS but I sometimes wished I had more reach than 200mm, especially in Istanbul and even more so from the cruise ship. Will I miss not having more reach than 200mm in Paris?

Has anyone here used a 100-400f/4.5-5.6L IS I or II in Paris?

Pietro.

I keep asking myself if I should bring my 70-200 f/2.8 L IS Mark II instead of my 70-200 f/4 L IS. Do I really NEED f/2.8 in a larger, heavier lens? Not really. So for my last two trips to Europe, my f/4 L IS has been in my bag. It certainly reduces the overall weight as I carry a pair of 5D Mark III's along with a 16-35 f/4 L IS, (love this lens) and the 24-70 f/4 L IS as well.

Years ago I also thought about bringing my 100-400 Version 1 as well. However I had to draw the line........now if I had the new 100-400 Version II........nah!  Like many here, I also have the 1.4 X Ext III that I leave in the backpack in the hotel as an option.

So for me, whether it's, Lisbon, Madrid, Barcelona, Rome, Florence, Venice and Paris, having the 16-200 mm covered has covered me well.

Now South Africa?...........

if you go to game park in SA, then it is different perhaps as then you need the reach.  I went to an Elephant park in SA and found my 70-200 f4 to have plenty of reach and plenty of light.  Now we weren't chasing other animals that are harder to get close to.

Dale Garman wrote:

if you go to game park in SA, then it is different perhaps as then you need the reach. I went to an Elephant park in SA and found my 70-200 f4 to have plenty of reach and plenty of light. Now we weren't chasing other animals that are harder to get close to.

No zoom needed for elephants. 

yep they get up close and personal.

Dale Garman wrote:

yep they get up close and personal.

Wow, that is close!! We have no Safari planned. For our trip to Paris I planned to bring my 6D, 16-35 and 70-200. But it is really hard to leave my 24-70 at home, it is by far my most used lens, it is very versatile, fast and have great IQ.

Regards
Pietro

Yes it is close and it is only at 85mm (although on an APC camera).  I'm starting to really love the 24-70 f4 with my 5D.  This seems like a really great lens.