Best lenses for Hawaii hikes?
Emancipator
Registered Users Posts: 50 Big grins
No brand preferences or financial restrictions. Thanks! 
0
Comments
Nikkor 600mm F4
.... with my Tamron 17-50 and Tokina 11-16. I have all those lenses with me at all times as well as my Nikkor 35 and 50. I'd bring them all on a hike like that. I never ever use my 18-200 though... even though I suggested it for you.
I think that's a reasonable selection. Plus they're all small/light lenses which can be stuffed in a jacket pocket if needs be.
In whatever situation you find yourself, you find the shots that can be made with the equipment you have with you. There are always so many possibilities that it isn't even funny. One of the problems with zoom lenses is that because they're so adaptable, they encourage people to be lazy and take the first shot that comes to mind.
Got bored with digital and went back to film.
Please describe your trip in some detail if you would like some real recommendations.
My typical travel kit includes:
Canon 40D
Sigma 10-20mm, f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
Canon EF-S 17-55mm, f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm, f/4L IS USM
Canon EF 50mm, f/1.4 USM
Canon 1.4x teleconverter
Close focus adapter, 3.3 diopter, to fit the 50mm, f/1.4, gives about 1/2 lifesize.
Sigma DG Super flash
Charger and spare battery.
Flash modifiers.
This can all fit a "sling" backpack and yes, I can carry it all day if necessary. (14 lbs - 6.35 kg)
Depending on the purpose I'll also add or subtract things like:
A second body, either crop or FF.
Additional lenses for specific subjects. (For instance a 500mm for wildlife or a 70-200mm, f2.8L for indoors events.)
One or two tripods.
Different tripod heads including a panoramic head.
Additional flashes.
About the lightest I travel anymore is a single crop body with the above 17-55mm and 70-200mm and a different diopter to fit the 70-200mm for close focus, and an external flash plus a Demb Flip-It. I can fit all of this into a camera holster with an attached lens case.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
That's an impressive equipment consideration. I would also recommend a second body, just in case (even a Rebel class would do), and recommend the EF 14mm f/2.8L USM II, versus the ver I.
I would also be lost without a standard zoom for both appropriate landscapes and social situations. If an EF 24-70mm, f2.8L USM is too heavy consider a Sigma alternative or use the EF 24-105, f4L IS USM instead.
The EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM is sharper than a 70-200mm, f2.8L plus teleconverter and it has a larger effective aperture @ 400mm. The 400mm4DO does have a rather busy bokeh, similar to a catadioptric (mirror) lens. My preference in good light would be an EF 300mm, f4L IS USM plus EF 1.4X III teleconverter for a more portable, and more flexible, configuration.
An EF 100-400mm, f4.5-5.6L IS USM might be a very good choice for a hike and replace both the 70-200 and longer lenses.
That's still a lot to carry but, if you have a good backpack, it's doable. Good shoe choice and socks, I recommend thinner "wicking" socks close to the foot and then thicker socks over that, will make a tremendous difference.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
For me, I would go for a pocket rocket like an S95 or a G12. Or if you really must go with the SLR, something like the nikon 28-300 would be nice for 1 do it all lens. Low light ability has a lot to do with your camera body too. Wide apertures are not a cure all for low light.
Again this comes back to what kind of shooting will you be doing? Some of my favorite shots from there were with my S90.
If so, any good bags you could recommend for such a set up?
http://fstopgear.com/
I suggest allowing 3 days for the Kalalau 22 mile hike, if you'll be doing serious photography as well. As such you will need a larger backpack anyway (for camping stuff) so just allow a large enough pack for the camera stuff too. The Cotton Carrier is pretty well designed to allow the camera to mount to your chest, or you could use a camera holster system to keep the camera and 1 lens handy.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
You're gonna buy gear bags and accessories for rental equipment....since you sold all the gear that would have served you well on this trip? Then, you don't own any equipment at all yet all of your posts since joining this forum are question after question asking us to make every little photography decision for you. I would think someone studying to become an engineer would be able to at least make some of the decisions all on their own or do some simple research.
Yes, kind of odd.
By the way..... Best color socks for shooting a wedding?
It's going to cost you a small fortune to rent all the good stuff.... plus BUY gear bags. Had you kept your D300 and a lens, you would have only had to rent a lens or two. I am going to assume that you were forced to sell your camera or you wouldn't have done it.
... and what about the Tokina 11-16 that you said you had less than a month ago? I'm confused since you also said you sold everything "awhile back". That's a good Hawaii lens.
"I cannot wait to go to the Grand Canyon.
I actually got the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and highly recommend it!"
If you're camping there is no need for a separate camera bag unless you establish a base camp and hike from that to the photo sites. I like using smaller bags and camera holsters, even bags not designed for cameras. Anything can potentially be put to use.
Some backpacks can be split into a smaller bag. Consider using extra socks to act as padding for individual pieces.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Yeah! Definately specific so I feel renting is best. It'll probably will be about $500 for a dslr and two pro level lenses for two weeks but if I bought them it would be around 5K so.... can't really justify that today. I would by a point and shoot but, I already have one and never use it. I will probably just use a daypack to keep the camera and lenses in. I liked the idea of the seperate units to buy and put into the bag. I still have my CF manfrotto tripod from my last trip laying around so I feel kind of dumb having a tripod without a camera. Eventually i'll have enough money for both a trip and pro gear. :cry
If you're going to use two cameras, consider a proper strap like the Black Rapid Double Strap.
Frankly, this sucked:
Thanks for the tips, I am worried about the 70-200mm 2.8 with an extender... I know x1.4 would be okay but that x2 is way too much, I think Nikon has a x1.7 maybe a happy medium?
Thanks!
I use a 70-200mm with a x1.7 and find it a good combination of reach and quality.
Personally, I wouldn't want to hike with a 70-200mm - too heavy for my wimpish tastes.
For hikes at high altitudes the lighter the better.
A canon G10 (15MP) with GND + Pol filter holder and a
<1 kg carbon tripod can do wonders. No, I am not joking
― Edward Weston
I wasn't saying you're lying. I was just confused from what seemed like conflicting statements. I think the best thing to do is what someone else suggested. Get a decent point and shoot with a gorilla pod. It's the lightest, easiest, and by far the cheapest way to do it. It's really the trip you want to document anyway and you don't have to have top level gear for that. Just make sure the camera has a decent zoom range, good image quality, and manual settings. You can have all of the above right in your pocket.... and without spending a lot of money. I wouldn't think twice about it and would go out and buy a point shoot just for the trip.... for probably less money than renting all the gear. Then you'll own a camera again even if it's not a DSLR. Point and shoots are pretty damn good these days and are perfect for what your doing.