p.1 #1 · Munich, Nuremberg and Frankfurt travel kit
I am doing a bucket list trip to some WWII sites in Munich, Dachau, Nuremberg and Frankfurt in December. While I would like to add more, this is just a start. in addition, I will be going to the Christmas markets in each city. I can take kit 1:
Nikon Z8 w/24-120 (daytime) and 24F1.4, 55F1.8 and 85F2 for night time
KIT 2:
Sony A7V or A7CII with 20-70F4, 24, 55 and 85. I might get a Sony 14F1.8 for loaner. My biggest concern is not enough reach. I will be staying 2 nights in each city, and taking the train to each location. The Sony lenses on the Nikon would be adapted.
p.1 #2 · Munich, Nuremberg and Frankfurt travel kit
I've got a trip coming up later this year, mostly France and a bit of London on the way out. Did Switzerland and a Rhine River cruise a couple of years back. I'm a zooms for convenience sort so several fast primes wouldn't be my approach. What I did have and from a focal length standpoint was the Tamron 28-200. (And a 17-28/2.8)
I used longer than 100mm/120mm, etc., fairly frequently. But, I never felt really hampered by stopping at 200mm on the long side. 17mm was almost always wide enough. Noting a lot of swapping at 28mm, I've added both a 20-70/4 and 14/4 to broaden options for "more urban" opportunities. Of course this leads to deciding one body or two. Take two on the trip but not every outing? Swapping between two cameras can be faster than lens swapping. Adapting?
The 24-120 has a lot of overlap on the long end. With cropping, maybe long enough?
There are lots of 2x-200 and 70-200 sorts. I don't think I'd rule out the 50-300 or 70-300 options, just they might be getting bigger and heavier. Might depend on if deciding the 20-70 is main carry or 24-120.
Add: I was using an A7Riv so I had resolution and crop space available. I didn't plan on it and use it intentionally to "add reach" or reduce lens count.
p.1 #3 · Munich, Nuremberg and Frankfurt travel kit
I spent much of the 2000s to early 2010s visiting Munich and region a few times a year. The latter half of that time with a Leica M kit that spanned 21 to 90mm. I didn't really miss longer than 90mm in the bag because I wasn't looking for those kinds of compositions, or otherwise ignored them. That said, there certainly can be opportunities for ~200mm.
A lot of those trips were in the winter when the light can be very interesting - low raking sunlight - but daylight will also be quite short and if it's not sunny, it can be fairly murky.
I just did ~9 days in Japan, mostly urban and brought a 28-70 and 70-200 plus 1.4x TC, supplemented with a 20mm prime I bought while there. I've kind of weaned myself off UWA and find I can get by with 28mm but the 20mm addition felt like a good one because I was used to that focal length with my M kit and IMO it's not too wide. I'm a Canon user and the 28-70 was the f/2, of which there is now a Sony equivalent. The Canon is a large and heavy lens (the Sony is lighter) and there were times when the full set was a bit of a drag (mostly when not actively shooting), but having f/2 in a zoom was very convenient because it really did replace my need (and desire) for a set of fast primes in that range. The 70-200 with TCs, was occasionally useful, but I probably could have gotten by without the TC and just cropped instead. I probably also would have been fine had I brought the much lighter and more compact 70-200/4. The trip was both visiting friends and sightseeing where f/2 was useful for people photos and less necessary for urban explorations. Even at night a slower aperture and IBIS would usually be viable. IMO having f/2 or faster would probably be more driven by creativity options for shallow depth of field work than the outright need for sheer light gathering power. I think the biggest downside of the 28-70 was that because of its size, it's pretty conspicuous in use around people and can make being subtle a bit difficult. But for my needs, that was an acceptable compromise in exchange for the convenience of a zoom and also f/2 in a zoom. Now, that was in Japan. Based on my past visits to Munich, it's also what I would currently bring there and Germany in general. UWA can have uses, such as in churches and in and around other interesting architectural locations, but it really depends on how you approach these locations and what you're looking for. With my M system sometimes I'd bring a 12/5.6 or 15/4.5 but found I used them so rarely that I generally didn't bother.
Something to keep in mind with photography in public spaces in Germany and Europe in general, is that laws around personal privacy in public and how it impacts photography that includes people without their permission is different (more restrictive) than in the USA/Canada. My experience has been that in touristy areas you're probably not going to get much reaction, but otherwise you may get some pushback if someone disagrees with potentially being included in your photos.
What locations are you hoping to visit/see in Munich?
p.1 #5 · Munich, Nuremberg and Frankfurt travel kit
gdanmitchell wrote:
Don’t miss the surfers in Munich.
No, I’m not kidding. :-)
Yeah, I was going to mention that...
A photo I happen to conveniently have online:
And yes, they surf in the year round, as you see here. This photo was take on a Monday in January, ~10 years ago. Most people watch and take photos from the bridge right above this wave, but there's nothing stopping you from venturing closer down to the water, other than some of the surfers may make a turn right in front of you and soak you...
Search "Eisbachwelle" on Google Maps or equivalent.
p.1 #6 · Munich, Nuremberg and Frankfurt travel kit
In case anyone stumbles upon reports from earlier this year about surfing now not only being prohibited but actually impossible following other fatal accident: since about early May it's possible to surf that way again.
Article in local (german) newspaper: https://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/muenchen-eisbach-welle-surfen-erlaubt-li.3480666
p.1 #7 · Munich, Nuremberg and Frankfurt travel kit
torstenb wrote:
In case anyone stumbles upon reports from earlier this year about surfing now not only being prohibited but actually impossible following other fatal accident: since about early May it's possible to surf that way again.
Article in local (german) newspaper: https://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/muenchen-eisbach-welle-surfen-erlaubt-li.3480666
p.1 #8 · Munich, Nuremberg and Frankfurt travel kit
gdanmitchell wrote:
We enjoyed watching it up close last winter.
It's always fun watching them, summer or winter. Gotta admit it's been 2 years since I've actually did that.
That said, I drove by today on the way to pick up my replacement printer in Munich and judging from the number of people standing on the bridge the surfers were there riding the wave.
