Lens preference for Disney World? Help!
Heading to Disney World next week and I'm torn between renting/buying a 17-55 2.8 or a 18-200mm. I'd love the simplicity of the 18-200 but what would I miss out on by not having a wider aperture avail? Anything? Also, I think I'm going to pick up a BlackRapid strap too.. I've read a lot of positive comments about them.
Any input? Any tips on other Disney related stuffs?
Appreciate all the help, guys/gals!
Any input? Any tips on other Disney related stuffs?
Appreciate all the help, guys/gals!
0
Comments
Carry your 50mm with you in case you really need something fast.
That's how I do it!
Fun wide (18mm)
Sharp even long (200mm)
VR comes in handy
Even nice for quick grabs during lunch
http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
Add the Nikone 50mm f1.8 and you're good to go. It's small enough to throw in a bag and have it with you for those shots in Pirates...
Facebook Fan Page
Blog
Put down the DSLR. Actually spend the time with the kids. Buy a Canon S90 or G11 and participate (without having to figure out how to carry the DSLR or how to protect it) with the kids.
Got bored with digital and went back to film.
I third that. It is just the reason I bought a point and shoot myself. If you get a good one the quality is almost as good as a DSLR. I find mine so useful because I can do anything and go anywhere with it. Nothing big and clunky hanging around my neck.
If you are set on your DSLR then I would go with the 18-200mm. For shooting the family and whatnot it will work great.
Or just put it in a Ziploc and not have to worry about waterproof clothes.
I think I have to concur on the P&S instead of DSLR. Let's face it -- you're not going to get any fine art photographs from Disney World. Snapshots of the fam is all you really want and a P&S is perfect for that. A camera bag is a real pain in the butt at Disney. It gets heavy, gets in the way, you always have to worry about keeping track of it, and you can't carry it on rides.
Link to my Smugmug site
If you want the ultimate vacation camera setup get an s90 $430ish + the canon underwater case $175. That is about the same $$ as the 18-200 and cheaper than the 17-55. You can't take your Nikon in the pool or waterpark either!
Facebook Fan Page
Blog
http://photos.thomasflock.com
WDW has a wide range of photo ops. For outdoor shots, if you're renting a lens, get the 18-200. Outdoor shots at WDW range from animals on Kilamanjaro Safari to characters with your kids in various places throughout the parks to fireworks over Cinderella's castle to Epcot's World Showcase. You'll need both a wide angle and a zoom for all of these ops. I've been using a Sigma 18-125 for the last few years, and it works for the most part, but I recently upgrades to a Canon 18-200is that I expect to not only give me more zoom and better low light performance due to the IS, but it should also be sharper than my Sigma.
For indoor shots, well, you'll need what you need for any indoor shots - either a fast lens or a flash, or both. Inside restaurants and shops, you can use flash. Inside most shows and rides, you can't use flash, so you'll need a fast lens, preferably a medium zoom. My Sigma 18-125 is not sufficient. I've tried my 18-55 kit lens, but it doesn't quite make it, either. The rented 17-55 2.8 will work well for you in those situations.
Personally, I've always preferred to have a single walkaround lens, and carry no spares. Naturally, this means there will be situations where my walkaround lens is not wide enough, not long enough, or not fast enough, but I make those sacrifices in order to keep my travelling weight down, because WDW entails a LOT of walking, and even the lightest camera bag will eventually feel like it's full of lead by the end of the day. But every so often, a spare lens for specialty situations sure comes in handy. So rent both lenses!
Use the 18-200 during the day. Plan an evening break into each days itinerary. Go back to your hotel, swap lenses, and use the 17-55 2.8 for night shooting. Once you have the 17-55 2.8, you can repeat the dark rides and get some pics with the faster lens.
For wet rides, and Florida's famous Liquid Sunshine, make yourself a camera poncho.
Be sure to carry plenty of extra memory cards and camera batteries; nothing sucks more than missing out on perfect photo ops because your battery died or you ran out of space on your cards.
Take and use the petal hoods for any lenses you take with you. Florida sunshine is great, but it's also a perfect storm for lens flare. Petal hoods also act as great bumpers, keeping folks from scratching your lens when they bump or rub against you in crowds.
If you have any specific questions about WDW, feel free to ask. I help people plan their trips all the time.
This is why I simplify my travel kit. I purposely bought the Nikkor 18-200mm lens and a D200 for these types of trips. I just throw my 50mm in my pocket just in case. This works for me, and I'm pleased with my photos when I get home.
http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
Here's my response to his PM:
I am in a lot of the pictures because the Disney PhotoPass photographers are happy to take photos of you with your camera (if you let them do theirs first). Each time they used my camera most said, "Wow, yours is so much better than mine." heh
http://photos.thomasflock.com
But over the years, (passholder) ...I've ventured around D-land with all manner of cameras and lenses, my favorite being my Nikon FM2 and a 24mm and 50mm prime. Manual exposure / focus, but gorgeous colors on some of my favorite films.
Or for night photography, my D300 and my 17-55 really did the trick.
Or before that I had a D70 and a Tokina 17mm, that was fun and a bit smaller than a zoom. I've also ventured into D-land with nothing but a fish-eye, that was fun!
Or, after my 17-55 was stolen, I got lazy and just started putting my 24mm f/2.8 on my D300. Nice and small! Of course since it's a manual focus lens, it's really only good for environmental shots, not for kids running around. But in conclusion, IMO, the most comfortable thing is probably going to be a 35mm (FX equivalent, so 24mm on crop) prime lens. To me, everything at Disneyland is best captured at a medium-wide angle. You can get candids, landscapes, and group shots all with 35mm. I say this having been there ~50 times. DisneyWORLD is probably similar.
Yeah, a zoom lets you do so much, but I find that being able to cover everything with just one lens usually makes me lazy with composition, timing, lighting, etc. I'd rather have just a dozen truly artistic images that I captured within the limitations of my lens, than a hundred snapshots of every wide and telephoto angle...
Haven't had a chance to share these images in a LONG time, so here goes!
(D300 with 24mm manual focus, SOOC JPG.)
(D300 with 24mm manual focus, SOOC JPG.)
(D300 with 10.5mm DX fisheye; doing self-engagement-portraits!)
(D300 with 10.5mm DX fisheye...)
(D300 with 17-55, at 38mm, using a ledge as a tripod and probably scraping up the camera a bit. ;-)
(Nikon FM2 and 17mm Tokina, Agfa Ultra Film. Braced on railing for a 1 sec. exposure)
(Nikon D70, Tokina 17mm, braced on ground for 13 sec. exposure.)
(D200 and a 17-55 at 26mm)
(Nikon D200 and 17-55 DX at 17mm)
(Nikon D200 and 17-55 DX at 55mm)
(Nikon D200 and 17-55 at 22mm)
(Nikon D200 and 17-55 at 17mm)
(Okay now we're going WAY back, when I accidentally stripped the EXIF from my blog files so I can only guess that this shot was made on a D700 and 17mm....)
(Same. D70 and 17mm?)
(And last but not least, the Pirates 3 world premier. I guess if you're going to a red-carpet event, a tele zoom IS the best thing to bring. 150mm on my Sigma 50-150, heavily cropped too.)
....So, in conclusion, my assesment is that I would be perfectly happy using a 35mm POV for casual trips to Disneyland, but I suppose that if I were only going ONCE, I might prefer a 17-55. However there is something to be said for having a small and light lens, it really does let you enjoy the day a lot more. Lugging around a heavy 17-55 is no fun.
Sorry for such a long post; I just felt like reminiscing back over the years!
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Just my 2 cents
Joe
To expand: Given unlimited resources I would get a bad ass P&S to use on 3 of the 6 days (Nikon P7000/Canon G12) on the other three days I would carry the dslr with 18-200, at late lunch break come back crazy with the 17-55/2.8 AND 70-200/2.8 and really look like the insane camera guy.
We make it to Disney currently at the rate of once per 3 years... so that was part of my decision factor as well. If we made more regular visits that would definitely change my thoughts.
http://photos.thomasflock.com
http://photos.thomasflock.com
I would love to do something with my D-land images someday, but I'm betting that would violate a million copyrights
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
The problem you will have is getting a wide enough lens to get in what you want. I did take the Nikon 70-200VR one day with me but didn't end up using it. Having the wide fast lens will allow you to take pictures inside the rides and after dark when everything really becomes magical. Below is a link to my WDW gallery on my website if you want to check them out.
http://www.jeffimpeyphotography.com/Other/Walt-Disney-World-Christmas/20742357_6vwz7L#!i=1647739327&k=Cc8NSLt
Why are you replying to a 4 year old thread?
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Sometimes folks don't notice the dates or they are looking for something similar.
No need to complain