Zoom lens - how big for Alaska

My biggest Zoom for my Canon 60D is 55-250mm. I'm wondering if it's enough for next year's Alaska trip. Whether I buy or rent - do I want something more, or do I stick with the flexibility and range of the above lens and crop to make a tighter shot?

(I also have a 28-135).

 

Help me, please.

For a Canon shooter the 100-400 is the Holy Grail for Alaska. Lensrentals.com is a good place to rent one.

 

Don't forget that there are also a million opportunities to use wide angle too. An amazing place that we never get tired of visiting.

 

Enjoy your trip!

 

Dave

First cruise, my wife and I rolled with EF-S 10-22, 16-35/2.8, 24-105/4IS, 70-200/2.8IS, 100/2.8IS Macro, and 500/4IS on three crop bodies and one "half-crop" body. We came home with this:

 

Second cruise, my wife and I rolled with 14/2.8, 16-35/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 70-200/4IS, 100/2.8IS Macro, and 400/4IS (with a 1.4x) on one FF, one "half-crop", and two crop bodies. We came home with this:

 

Recent cruise, I went with 15/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 70-200/4, and 200-400/4 (which could become a 280-560/5.6 at the flip of a switch) on two FF and one "half-crop" body, while my wife would pick and choose amongst 14/2.8, 24-105/4IS, 70-200/4IS, 100/2.8IS Macro, and 300/4IS on one FF and one crop body. We came home with this:

I will say that my combo was fantastically functional - you can see my vest/belt with BlackRapid Double amongst the Mendenhall Glacier shots. I kept the 200-400 on the monopod with a "dedicated" camera, and normally kept the 24-70/2.8 on the half-crop body on my left side. I'd then have either 70-200/4 (when there was major wildlife action) or 15/2.8 (when there was major scenery) on the other FF body on my right side. During the Tracy Arm excursion, you'll see a shot of my wife shooting the 14/2.8 - that's uncropped from the 280-560/5.6. The very next shot is from the 14/2.8, and you can see my lens over on the right side. Later to begin our day in Skagway, you'll see a wide shot of the Skagway sidewalk, then a closeup of the pastel green roof - both were taken from the same spot.

 

I personally "hate" the current 100-400. The rumor mill really thought a new 100-400 with traditional twist zoom would come next month, but now they think not. If it were to come, I'd probably go with 16-35/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 100-400, and 600/4 with a 1.4x, but I do tend to go "heavy" as I'm sure you can tell. ;)

I had a 80-400mm Sigma and definitely used it.

My travel telephoto is the Canon 100-400L. It spends 95% of it's time all the way out but the zoom feature is nice as it collapses down to a more travel friendly size.

 

If you are considering renting or buying a new lens I strongly recommend that you practice, practice, practice. Zoom lenses are very unforgiving compared to shorter focal lengths especially when shooting from a moving platform like a ship or boat. Image stabilization helps but holding steady when you press the shutter is very critical.

Peety3 thank you - beautiful shots.

 

To the rest of you... thank you also. I will look at the 300+ (probably 400mm) options. And I've been contemplating something wider also.

You may want to add Image Stabilization to the list of lens options. If you go whale watching or out on any moving tour and shoot on the move, you will need IS or shoot at 1/500 or more to get blur free shots. I have been whale watching with my 28-300 IS lens on my Canon and got great shots while others with regular lenses got fuzzy shots. Yes you can get by, but I want the great shots and having done this for 40+ years, have found Image Stabilization to be one of the best improvements in the past few years. On our last cruise in the Eastern Med, I used a 18-135 Canon IS SDM lens to shoot everything, inside or outside it worked. Alaska is sometimes further away and needs more lens, in Europe the bus or van will get closer to the subject at hand.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Steviewonder1

You may want to add Image Stabilization to the list of lens options. If you go whale watching or out on any moving tour and shoot on the move, you will need IS or shoot at 1/500 or more to get blur free shots. I have been whale watching with my 28-300 IS lens on my Canon and got great shots while others with regular lenses got fuzzy shots. Yes you can get by, but I want the great shots and having done this for 40+ years, have found Image Stabilization to be one of the best improvements in the past few years. On our last cruise in the Eastern Med, I used a 18-135 Canon IS SDM lens to shoot everything, inside or outside it worked. Alaska is sometimes further away and needs more lens, in Europe the bus or van will get closer to the subject at hand.

 

Thank you... I agree. IS is the way to go.

My 55-250mm is IS as is the 18-135mm

Thank you... I agree. IS is the way to go.

My 55-250mm is IS as is the 18-135mm

 

FYI, before you dump on your 55-250, all of the tele shots in my Alaska gallery from last year were shot with a 70-200 f/2.8.

 

http://galleries.pptphoto.com/alaska2013

 

Dave

FYI, before you dump on your 55-250, all of the tele shots in my Alaska gallery from last year were shot with a 70-200 f/2.8.

 

http://galleries.pptphoto.com/alaska2013

 

Dave

 

I wasn't going to dump the 55-250... Was looking to get something in addition to....

 

Thanks for sharing. Fantabulous!! And I love that Paper app... I have to look into that.

I'm 11 months away from my Alaska cruise, but already debating what camera gear to bring/rent, etc..

 

My primary camera is my full-frame A99........

The lens that comes to mind, is to rent the Sony 70-400.

 

But should I take it a step further, and rent the 70-400 AND an A77ii body, to get effectively 105-600 with better AF and tracking? (I may just buy a used A77ii shortly before the trip and then re-sell it afterwards).

 

Then what to do for wide angle? Pack a second lens and change lenses? If I get the A77ii just for the trip, do I also bring the A99 with a wide lens on it? Get by with my RX100 for 28-100 normal view shots? Maybe even rent a RX10 as a second body, for 24-200 range?

 

So many options.

So many options.

 

Exactly my problem!

Two years ago we did the inside passage and Denali on the Sapphire Princess. I had two cameras with me; a canon with a 12X zoom and a Konica Minolta with just a 7X zoom. The Minolta is the far superior camera for quality of picture by far. However, while in Denali, a fellow traveler showed me the photo he had taken of a moose with his Fuji FinePix and its 30X zoom. It blew me away! I purchased it from Amazon for about $230.00 and am very pleased with the results. For the money, it can't be beat. The only minor complaint I have is that when the zoom is fully extended it is hard to focus. Thus a tripod or monopod is necessary. My guess is that up to about 25X there is no problem. If you want to see the quality of the photos, I have uploaded slide shows of recent trips to YouTube. The one of Scotland is the most illustrative of the zoom. On you tube just search for Jim and Lee Scotland trip slide show. To answer your question, the 12x zoom was not enough for Alaska.

 

Sent from my AT100 using Forums mobile app