Digital SLR and Lenses for Alaska

[DJD-Houston]

I have cross posted this on the Photo Discussion board, but I'm thinking that some here might have some experience that can help me.

 

I am taking my first cruise this summer (Alaska with RCCL) and I'm having trouble deciding which lenses to take with me. My activities will include kayaking, hiking, biking, helicoptor flight with glacier landing, float plane flight to remote a lodge, plus glacier viewing and shots around this ship, etc. I have a Canon 40D and my lens choices include a 16-35mm f2.8, a 24-105mm f4.0 IS, 70-200mm f2.8 IS, and a 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 DO IS. The 70-200mm f2.8 IS is the longest and heaviest of these options and I can cover the range with the other lenses, but this one is a particular favorite so it's hard to think about leaving it at home! Also, do I need the extra wide angle coverage provided by the 16-35mm? Or can I get by with the 24-105mm? :)

 

I know it's a personal decision, but I'm looking for opinions . . . those of you who are camera buffs, what would you recommend?

 

Thanks in advance for your help!

 

Deborah ;)

[dahkota]

I'm going in June with my 30D and a 300D as backup. I'm taking a Tokina fish for the fun of it and my 17-40L for my wide shots. Then I have the 28-75 2.8 for my on ship/in town stuff, my 70-300 IS for boat stuff, and my 100-400L for land based nature shots. I also will have my range of filters - polarizer is required - including an IR filter, also for the fun of it.

 

Having been to Alaska before I can tell you that you will use all of the lenses you listed. Whales and other wildlife require a long lens and the sweeping panoramas really scream for as wide a lens as you have.

 

I will note that you should not necessarily believe any weather resistant or water tight claims; I lost a professional grade sigma to mist. The motor still won't work 2 years later. The only place I would really worry that you listed was in the kayak. For that, I would only take a short, easy to manage, and light lens and a really waterproof bag/case.

 

BTW - I will be using a monopod for the 100-400L. I tend to spend hours hiking and snapping and it gets a little heavy after a while...

 

I'd love to see what you get from the 70-200. That's the next lens on my list...

[OldCodger73]

You will definitely need a wide angle so take the 16-35. Remember on the 40D there's the 1.6 crop factor so 16mm really works out to about 26mm while the 24 - 105 works out to about 38mm, which isn't very wide. I'm also not a great fan of the 70 - 200 zoom as the focal length doesn't work for me, so I'd bring the 70 - 300 DO. An 100 - 400L would be even better. I'd only take the 70 - 200 if you're planning on shooting the shows.

 

My gear for the Alaska cruises I've taken were an XT, 10 - 22, 24 - 105L, 135L and the 100 - 400L and I felt that covered what I wanted to shoot.

 

Regarding kayaking, I'd feel much more comfortable with a P&S for that.

 

Of course, when it comes to photography, everyone has their own likes and dislikes. Be sure and take plenty of memory cards though.

[DJD-Houston]

Thanks Dahkota and Codger. Your concerns about the kayaking are appreciated. I do have a drybag that I'll put the SLR camera gear in for that trip and I also have a small point and shoot with a waterproof casing. I'll take both cameras on that excursion and use them according to the conditions.

 

As much as I'd like to save on the weight, I'm leaning toward taking all 4 lenses since they each have advantages in certain situations. I'd hate to get there and need the one I left at home! :(

 

Everyone seems to highly recommend the 100-400 . . . it is next on my wish list, but that's unlikely to happen in time for this trip.

 

Thanks again for your help.

 

Deborah

[azddave]

Deborah,

 

You are getting some good advice. Regarding your kayaking trip were it me I'd leave my expensive bodies and lenses on the ship or secured elswhere. Waterproof bags or not I would not take the chance of water damage. We are taking 20D and 30D bodies, so that means several short and long lenses. 100-400L and 300L on the long end and 17-85IS and 18-55 kit lens on the short end. Throw in a 70-200F4 and a 50 1.8 just in case and we're good to go (I hope). As you can tell I don't mind lugging lenses around (and DW doesn't mind me doing it either!)

 

If you're hesitent to bring both your 70-200 2.8 and 70-300 DO, why not just bring the 70-200 and a 1.4X teleconverter? You only loose 1 stop I believe. I know it will still auto focus and you will have a 280mm F4 lens. I always bring mine as it's small and doesn't take up much room. Just a thought.

 

I may take dahkota's advice and bring my monopod for the biggest lens.

 

Have a great time on your cruise. We leave in less than 3 weeks!

 

 

Dave

[photodoodle]

I did not take a monopod for the 100-400. Believe me, I'm kind of wimpy and I got by. You wouldn't want to use a mono- or tri- pod on the deck of the ship or small boat (ie whale watching tour) because it transfers vibration to the camera. Plus it is kind of cumbersome when there are other people around.

Anyway, just my opinion. My photo emphasis was birds and wildlife, and I didn't miss having a monopod.

[DJD-Houston]

Deborah,

 

You are getting some good advice. Regarding your kayaking trip were it me I'd leave my expensive bodies and lenses on the ship or secured elswhere. Waterproof bags or not I would not take the chance of water damage. We are taking 20D and 30D bodies, so that means several short and long lenses. 100-400L and 300L on the long end and 17-85IS and 18-55 kit lens on the short end. Throw in a 70-200F4 and a 50 1.8 just in case and we're good to go (I hope). As you can tell I don't mind lugging lenses around (and DW doesn't mind me doing it either!)

 

If you're hesitent to bring both your 70-200 2.8 and 70-300 DO, why not just bring the 70-200 and a 1.4X teleconverter? You only loose 1 stop I believe. I know it will still auto focus and you will have a 280mm F4 lens. I always bring mine as it's small and doesn't take up much room. Just a thought.

 

I may take dahkota's advice and bring my monopod for the biggest lens.

 

Have a great time on your cruise. We leave in less than 3 weeks!

 

 

Dave

 

Thanks Dave. I agree . . . lots of good advice from everyone! You're probably right about the 70-200 with 1.4x TC, but the 70-300 is the smallest of my lenses so I may end up carrying it along anyway. I wish I had a wonderful DH like you to lug everything around for me, but I'm on my own there! ;) As for the kayak, I have carried the good camera and a lens or two (never all of them) in a good dry bag tied securely to the kayak before and it worked for me. I'll play it by ear this time depending on the weather (if it's raining I'll probably stick to the P&S).

 

I hope you have a wonderful trip! I can't wait to hear your report and see some photos when you return!

 

Deborah

[picture time]

I love the 70-200 lens. I am taking the 70-200 2.8, 100-400, 1.4x TC, and a 28-200 lens. I have been using the 1.4x TC with the 70-200 lens to practice and I have gotten some nice shots of some action(sports). I would take all of the lenses- Last year I felt I needed more distance than the 70-200 on some shots in Alaska.

 

I am still debating on whether to take a monopod. I wouldn't use it on boat tours but I would probably like it when I go to Brooks Falls.

 

azddave- I am jealous- I still have two months to go- have fun

[DJD-Houston]

I love the 70-200 lens. I am taking the 70-200 2.8, 100-400, 1.4x TC, and a 28-200 lens. I have been using the 1.4x TC with the 70-200 lens to practice and I have gotten some nice shots of some action(sports). I would take all of the lenses- Last year I felt I needed more distance than the 70-200 on some shots in Alaska.

 

I am still debating on whether to take a monopod. I wouldn't use it on boat tours but I would probably like it when I go to Brooks Falls.

 

azddave- I am jealous- I still have two months to go- have fun

 

 

Picture Time,

 

Sports/action shots are one of my favorites with the 70-200. Have you had the opportunity to shoot anything with that lens and the 1.4x in low light or cloudy conditions? If so, how did that go? Did you get good results? We don't have a lot of cloudy weather here in Houston this time of year, so I may not have a chance to check out cloudy or overcast conditions prior to my trip. Thanks for any insight you can give with this combination.

 

Deborah

[DJD-Houston]

Out of curiosity, I have a quick question for those of you with experience using the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS. How do you like the zoom on it? Doesn't it have a push/pull zoom? Do you have any problems with this type of zoom vs the zoom on the 70-200 f/2.8L IS?

 

Thanks! :)

 

Deborah

[picture time]

I took this shot on a cloudy day- I think I used the extender. I took some pictures at a baseball game and when the sun went behind the clouds I didn't have a problem with light.

I only used the 100-400 once.

[dahkota]

Out of curiosity, I have a quick question for those of you with experience using the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS. How do you like the zoom on it? Doesn't it have a push/pull zoom? Do you have any problems with this type of zoom vs the zoom on the 70-200 f/2.8L IS?

 

Thanks! :)

 

Deborah

 

Due to the size of the barrel, the push/pull makes sense. I love using it - I can make it really loose to quickly zoom in or out on a changing scene. I shot a lot of daytime football with the lens, in addition to moving wildlife. It takes a little getting used to but becomes second nature when you've done it enough.

 

As for the monopod, whether the boat vibration transfers through me or the monopod, it makes no difference (it does transfer through both). The key is to figure out the rate of vibration and compensate by setting your shutter speed just a hair faster. With a 9-10 hour boat tour on my agenda, I can't see my shoulders holding up the weight steadily that long. I know the IS compensates for some of the shake but it will get to a point where even that will not keep the slight blur out of images. I need them sharp at 100% (which I know will be almost impossible on a boat with less than optimal lighting).

 

I will also be taking a tripod for land based shots - waves, waterfalls, streams, sunsets and rises, calving glaciers, even the stray IR shot or two. I like working with long exposures and they require a tripod.

[photodoodle]

I am still debating on whether to take a monopod. I wouldn't use it on boat tours but I would probably like it when I go to Brooks Falls.

Brooks Falls!!! I'm jealous! :D I can't wait to hear about it.

[DJD-Houston]

Due to the size of the barrel, the push/pull makes sense. I love using it - I can make it really loose to quickly zoom in or out on a changing scene. I shot a lot of daytime football with the lens, in addition to moving wildlife. It takes a little getting used to but becomes second nature when you've done it enough.

 

Thanks for your thoughts on the push/pull zoom. And thanks to everyone for their thoughts on this thread! You've all given me some great advice and some things to think about.

 

I'll definitely pack the 16-35mm and the 24-105mm lenses. I might bite the bullet and order the 100-400mm before the trip. If I do that and it works for me, I'll probably leave the 70-200mm and the 70-300mm at home. If I don't order the 100-400 I'll probably end up taking both of the other two lenses . . . We'll see! :eek:

 

For those of you going to Alaska this summer, I can't wait to hear and see more from you when you return!! Meanwhile, if anyone has any additional thoughts, I'm open to them! :D

 

Thanks again!

 

Deborah

[OldCodger73]

Out of curiosity, I have a quick question for those of you with experience using the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS. How do you like the zoom on it? Doesn't it have a push/pull zoom? Do you have any problems with this type of zoom vs the zoom on the 70-200 f/2.8L IS?

 

Thanks! :)

 

Deborah

 

I really like the push-pull zoom, once you get used to it I think it's faster than the conventional twist zoom. But then again, I cut my teeth on push-pull zooms on SLR film cameras before autofocus came into vogue.

[picture time]

Brooks Falls!!! I'm jealous! :D I can't wait to hear about it.

 

I am not going till the middle of July but I will share my pics and experience. If I didn't say it before- thanks for sharing your photos. Nice pics! I have to thank you for helping me decide to get the 100-400 lens. I knew I wanted a longer lens but was undecided if I should get one.

[janmcn]

Just off the Veendam in Seward and waiting to board the Volendam on Sunday to return. I have my Canon 20D with 24-105 and RENTED the 100-400 for the trip...which I'm glad I did. (Left my 70-200 and the 17-40 at home this trip.) I have been able to use both but, as usual...the one that is on is never the one you want for "that shot." I've ended up keeping the 100-400 on most the time, figuring I'm "majoring" in wildlife this trip. We use a point and shoot for "scenes" that we want to grab. I brought the 17-40 last trip and found the distortion wasn't pleasant for the mountain scenery. I like the 24-105 better. I've liked the 100-400...got used to the push-pull quickly. Not a problem. Renting is a great option, in my opinion for these limited use lenses.

[photodoodle]

Just off the Veendam in Seward and waiting to board the Volendam on Sunday to return. I have my Canon 20D with 24-105 and RENTED the 100-400 for the trip...which I'm glad I did. (Left my 70-200 and the 17-40 at home this trip.) I have been able to use both but, as usual...the one that is on is never the one you want for "that shot." I've ended up keeping the 100-400 on most the time, figuring I'm "majoring" in wildlife this trip. We use a point and shoot for "scenes" that we want to grab. I brought the 17-40 last trip and found the distortion wasn't pleasant for the mountain scenery. I like the 24-105 better. I've liked the 100-400...got used to the push-pull quickly. Not a problem. Renting is a great option, in my opinion for these limited use lenses.

I had pretty much the same experience. I majored in wildlife on my AK cruise, so I kept the 100-400 on most of the time. Nearly everything else was shot with the 24-105 which is a very versatile and very sharp general purpose lens.

I'm looking forward to seeing your photos and hearing about your trip.

[DJD-Houston]

Just off the Veendam in Seward and waiting to board the Volendam on Sunday to return. I have my Canon 20D with 24-105 and RENTED the 100-400 for the trip...which I'm glad I did. (Left my 70-200 and the 17-40 at home this trip.) I have been able to use both but, as usual...the one that is on is never the one you want for "that shot." I've ended up keeping the 100-400 on most the time, figuring I'm "majoring" in wildlife this trip. We use a point and shoot for "scenes" that we want to grab. I brought the 17-40 last trip and found the distortion wasn't pleasant for the mountain scenery. I like the 24-105 better. I've liked the 100-400...got used to the push-pull quickly. Not a problem. Renting is a great option, in my opinion for these limited use lenses.

 

Do you find that you miss your 17-40 at all? I have the 24-105 also and I'm trying to decide if I can get by without my 16-35. How about the 70-200? Do you miss the larger aperture compared to the 100-400? I'm afraid if I leave the 70-200 at home I'll miss the 2.8 aperture in low light.

 

I look forward to seeing pics when you get a chance to post them!

 

Deborah

[mh75]

Is it advisable to use a polarizing filter?

I have a 350D (well borrowed from brother :D ) that I'm taking to Alaska at the end of this month. I've just ordered a polarizing filter thinking that I would need one, but any advice would be most welcome.

Thanks

[MeadMkr]

Is it advisable to use a polarizing filter?

 

Filters don't take up much room in the bag and can be very useful depending on the situation. Whenever I shoot around water or with lots of reflective surfaces I tend to use the polarizer. I also have started using lens hoods more than UV filters to protect the lense and also to cut down on flare.

 

I've posted this tip before but if you want specialty filters (like IR or split Neutral density) for using with multiple lenses with different size filter threads consider buying the largest sized filter and then use step-up rings to use the smaller threads with the larger filter.

 

Cheers

Chris in VA

[janmcn]

Yes, a polarizer is always in my bag...but so is a split ND filter, etc. All useful in AK.

 

You might miss the 2.8, but more than likely you'd be too far away from wildlife with it (the 70-200) so I'd risk only the 100-400 for the added length.

 

This week we've had total sun (BRIGHT...lots of sun off the snow, but then you have the dark trees...difficult to photo without bracketing, etc.) but now we're in low clouds (fog) and dull days. Rain likely.

 

I've not missed the 17-40 at all. I'm stitching anything that wide with better results using my 24-105.

 

I'm happy with the gear I've brought and don't regret anything. Now, if the animals would be trained to come when you call, that would help!

 

AK is beautiful right now...lots of snow on the mountains. Sun forecasted for Mon and Tues. Taking a Haines "Photo Tour" and hope to find more eagles, moose, bear then...the bears are out now.

 

Jan

 

Jan

[kenish]

A comment about polarizers- on a helicopter or aircraft the polarizer will create a rainbow effect through the Plexiglas windows. Change to a clear or ND filter on the ground.

 

BTW most of the helo tours have carry-on restrictions that pretty much rule out taking along a camera bag full of lenses. There was a thread about a month ago about this.

[janmcn]

Deborah...just back from two AK cruises (HAL Veendam and Volendam) so can now give you REAL info on what I used. For photos out of the small fixed-wing plane, I used my 24-105 with just UV filter on and it was perfect. I could zoom in a bit if I wanted to "crop out" the wings of the plane, but other times, I wanted the wings a bit for "atmosphere." Used TV at 1600 to remove movement. NO IS on. MF at infinity. All photos were in focus...at least for my use.

 

I used the 100-400 a LOT. I decided I'd just do "animals or closeups" mostly (used a point and shoot for scenes I wanted to just remember). Whenever I had the 24-105 on, THAT's when the whale would Spy Hop or the eagle would fly over, etc....so I ended up just keeping the long lens on most the time. Got some cute shots of sea otters on ice floes, etc. that other folks couldn't get.

 

One thing I didn't do...bring all my "cleaning gear" for cleaning the sensor and with all the lens changes it got DIRTY! UGH! Major Photoshop work on many photos now. Lesson learned. So, bringing only the two lenses (24-105 and 100-400) were fine. I did some "stitchable photos" with the 24-105 that I shall try to put together later. A professional photographer gave me a great recommendation....ptgui for stitching. He did some awesome stitches (Ok, he had a Leica) using it, so it convinced me...it'll save taking a wider angle lens if I can get it to work well. Expensive, but worth it.

 

I wish for you the great weather and scenery we saw! AWESOME trip. Highlight was Taku Glacier Lodge trip out of Juneau.

Jan

[DJD-Houston]

Deborah...just back from two AK cruises (HAL Veendam and Volendam) so can now give you REAL info on what I used. For photos out of the small fixed-wing plane, I used my 24-105 with just UV filter on and it was perfect. I could zoom in a bit if I wanted to "crop out" the wings of the plane, but other times, I wanted the wings a bit for "atmosphere." Used TV at 1600 to remove movement. NO IS on. MF at infinity. All photos were in focus...at least for my use.

 

I used the 100-400 a LOT. I decided I'd just do "animals or closeups" mostly (used a point and shoot for scenes I wanted to just remember). Whenever I had the 24-105 on, THAT's when the whale would Spy Hop or the eagle would fly over, etc....so I ended up just keeping the long lens on most the time. Got some cute shots of sea otters on ice floes, etc. that other folks couldn't get.

 

One thing I didn't do...bring all my "cleaning gear" for cleaning the sensor and with all the lens changes it got DIRTY! UGH! Major Photoshop work on many photos now. Lesson learned. So, bringing only the two lenses (24-105 and 100-400) were fine. I did some "stitchable photos" with the 24-105 that I shall try to put together later. A professional photographer gave me a great recommendation....ptgui for stitching. He did some awesome stitches (Ok, he had a Leica) using it, so it convinced me...it'll save taking a wider angle lens if I can get it to work well. Expensive, but worth it.

 

I wish for you the great weather and scenery we saw! AWESOME trip. Highlight was Taku Glacier Lodge trip out of Juneau.

Jan

 

 

 

Hi Jan. Thank you so much for the update, I'm glad you had such a great trip! Your report has made me even more anxious to go . . . I don't know how I'm going to wait until the end of July! And I really can't wait for the Taku Glacier Lodge trip!! :D

 

I did break down and purchase the 100-400. I've been trying it out for the last week or so and I'm getting more and more comfortable with it. Considering the distance of the wildlife I think your report has convinced me that, even though I might miss the 2.8 aperture, the 70-200 f/2.8 would not see enough use to justify hauling it along. I'm still wavering on the 16-35. Although it's not light, it is relatively small compared to the 70-200, so we'll see. In addition to the 100-400 I'll definitely bring the 24-105 as well as the sensor cleaning gear, just in case!

 

Thanks again for your report. It has helped a lot to hear from someone with such similar equipment options and an, apparently, similar photography style and interest! I'd love to see some of your photos if you'd like to post a link when you have time!! :)

 

Deborah