Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
p.1 #1Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
I'll be skitouring in Lofoten in mid-April (and before that, I'll skitour in La Grave in a week's time).
In the past, on similar trips I carried one of the following:
- Sony 24-105 f4
- Sony 70-200 GM2
- Samyang Remaster (didn't really work out, no time to change lenses)
- phone only
- Panasonic TZ100
I am very tempted to buy and carry either the Tamron 25-200 plus my Viltrox 14/4, or the Sigma 20-200.
I would sell the Sony 24-105 as part exchange, since it's too much in the middle for me: not wide enough, not long enough, not fast enough, not fantastic IQ either. (I have better lenses for proper landscape, I need something wider/longer for hiking and touring).
Which one would you get?
Sample photos:
Lofoten, Sony 24-105
(Close to) La Grave, 70-200 GM2
iphone
In the past, on similar trips I carried one of the following:
- Sony 24-105 f4
- Sony 70-200 GM2
- Samyang Remaster (didn't really work out, no time to change lenses)
- phone only
- Panasonic TZ100
I am very tempted to buy and carry either the Tamron 25-200 plus my Viltrox 14/4, or the Sigma 20-200.
I would sell the Sony 24-105 as part exchange, since it's too much in the middle for me: not wide enough, not long enough, not fast enough, not fantastic IQ either. (I have better lenses for proper landscape, I need something wider/longer for hiking and touring).
Which one would you get?
Sample photos:
Lofoten, Sony 24-105
(Close to) La Grave, 70-200 GM2
iphone
Feb 28, 2026 at 01:08 PM
p.1 #2Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
I take a a7r3, second hand, tamron adaptall2 sp 24-48mm and 60-300mm for skiing, an fe-om adapter., and a 17-28mm & 28-200mm tamron for non-skiing.
17-200 covers non skiing. and SP adaptall2 are solid enough to resist falls and collisions
17-200 covers non skiing. and SP adaptall2 are solid enough to resist falls and collisions
Feb 28, 2026 at 05:41 PM
p.1 #3Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
I have really enjoyed the 20-200 for hiking. The image quality is good, though vignetting is high, and the range cannot be beat.
Feb 28, 2026 at 08:23 PM
p.1 #4Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
Slalom wrote:
I take a a7r3, second hand, tamron adaptall2 sp 24-48mm and 60-300mm for skiing, an fe-om adapter., and a 17-28mm & 28-200mm tamron for non-skiing.
17-200 covers non skiing. and SP adaptall2 are solid enough to resist falls and collisions
---------------------------------------------
Thank you! I fall far less these days, most ski weeks I don't fall at all, so I'm getting bolder and bolder about carrying expensive gear. But I will probably take my A7R5 only on the Lofoten trip, where I think we won't ski anything superdifficult. For La Grave, either the A73 or, most likely, my well-used A9.
kevphoto wrote:
I have really enjoyed the 20-200 for hiking. The image quality is good, though vignetting is high, and the range cannot be beat.
Thank you. I'm leaning towards the 20-200 (and then the 14/4 Air is light enough to pack just in case, but I'll have far fewer lens changes).
I probably wouldn't get the 20-200 if it was my only travel lens (too dark), but since I can chop and change depending on the purpose of the trip, it seems to be made for skitouring (lots of light, depth of field usually welcome, etc).
One more pic with the 24-105 (cropped in):
I take a a7r3, second hand, tamron adaptall2 sp 24-48mm and 60-300mm for skiing, an fe-om adapter., and a 17-28mm & 28-200mm tamron for non-skiing.
17-200 covers non skiing. and SP adaptall2 are solid enough to resist falls and collisions
---------------------------------------------
Thank you! I fall far less these days, most ski weeks I don't fall at all, so I'm getting bolder and bolder about carrying expensive gear. But I will probably take my A7R5 only on the Lofoten trip, where I think we won't ski anything superdifficult. For La Grave, either the A73 or, most likely, my well-used A9.
kevphoto wrote:
I have really enjoyed the 20-200 for hiking. The image quality is good, though vignetting is high, and the range cannot be beat.
Thank you. I'm leaning towards the 20-200 (and then the 14/4 Air is light enough to pack just in case, but I'll have far fewer lens changes).
I probably wouldn't get the 20-200 if it was my only travel lens (too dark), but since I can chop and change depending on the purpose of the trip, it seems to be made for skitouring (lots of light, depth of field usually welcome, etc).
One more pic with the 24-105 (cropped in):
Mar 01, 2026 at 08:28 AM
p.1 #5Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
I would recommend the Tamron 28-200. I have taken it with me on a snowboarding trip in Ski Dolomiti and never felt the need to go wider than 28mm when on the mountain. The speed of this lens vs the newer 25-200 and the Sigma 20-200 is the reason to go with the 28-200. Photos from the trip were mainly taken with the 28-200.
https://www.flickr.com/gp/anitacola/ui2E2jjRu3
For shooting action on the mountain, I personally find the FE85 to be a great choice, and would recommend this as a second lens. It has enough reach for your approaching subject, and tracks tenaciously even on a non-sports body like the A7RV. As an added bonus, you get a different look than the 70-200GMii without the bulk. I own both, but the majority of my on-mountain action shots are taken with the FE85.
https://www.flickr.com/gp/anitacola/ui2E2jjRu3
For shooting action on the mountain, I personally find the FE85 to be a great choice, and would recommend this as a second lens. It has enough reach for your approaching subject, and tracks tenaciously even on a non-sports body like the A7RV. As an added bonus, you get a different look than the 70-200GMii without the bulk. I own both, but the majority of my on-mountain action shots are taken with the FE85.
Mar 03, 2026 at 10:25 PM
AmbientMike
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.1 #6Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
jaggedhorizon wrote:
I'll be skitouring in Lofoten in mid-April (and before that, I'll skitour in La Grave in a week's time).
In the past, on similar trips I carried one of the following:
- Sony 24-105 f4
- Sony 70-200 GM2
- Samyang Remaster (didn't really work out, no time to change lenses)
- phone only
- Panasonic TZ100
I am very tempted to buy and carry either the Tamron 25-200 plus my Viltrox 14/4, or the Sigma 20-200.
I would sell the Sony 24-105 as part exchange, since it's too much in the middle for me: not wide enough, not long enough, not fast enough, not fantastic...Show more →
Is 20-200 going to give you fantastic iq vs 24-105? Probably not, on such a wide-ranging zoom. And 25 on the 25-200 a little worse on the wide end vs 24-105, 14mm helps doubt 25-200 has much better iq though. Generally have to accept compromises or carry more gear
Mar 04, 2026 at 10:39 AM
p.1 #7Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
My solution would be Sony 16-35 PZ + Tamron 50-300. This is what I use for hiking.
Mar 04, 2026 at 12:09 PM
|
p.1 #8Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
I'd get something light and longer, shooting in snow you'll have plenty of light. Both La Grave and Lofoton offers steep terrain - you need to keep your gear light and minimal.
Are you going for touring/skiing or for taking photos?
Are you going for touring/skiing or for taking photos?
Mar 04, 2026 at 01:35 PM
p.1 #9Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
Newenglandrocks wrote:
I would recommend the Tamron 28-200. I have taken it with me on a snowboarding trip in Ski Dolomiti and never felt the need to go wider than 28mm when on the mountain. The speed of this lens vs the newer 25-200 and the Sigma 20-200 is the reason to go with the 28-200. Photos from the trip were mainly taken with the 28-200.
https://www.flickr.com/gp/anitacola/ui2E2jjRu3
For shooting action on the mountain, I personally find the FE85 to be a great choice, and would recommend this as a second lens. It has enough reach for your approaching subject, and tracks tenaciously even on...Show more →
Thank you. Some nice photos there.
I've been thinking for a long time about the 28-200, before the T25-200 and S20-200 came up. But I always ended up deciding that 28mm is too narrow and I'd be swapping lenses way too often.
Interesting about the 85mm. Gotta say, when I'm skiing and touring with friends, it's hard to use a fixed FL. I never know what and how I'll need to frame.
---------------------------------------------
AmbientMike wrote:
Is 20-200 going to give you fantastic iq vs 24-105? Probably not, on such a wide-ranging zoom. And 25 on the 25-200 a little worse on the wide end vs 24-105, 14mm helps doubt 25-200 has much better iq though. Generally have to accept compromises or carry more gear
Very good point. Thing is, I wasn't in love with the IQ of the 24-105, compared to the 16-35 GM and the 70-200 GM. But at least 20-200 would give me lots more options without lens changes.
---------------------------------------------
dakel wrote:
My solution would be Sony 16-35 PZ + Tamron 50-300. This is what I use for hiking.
This is a strong solution for hiking. For skitouring, changing lenses is more tricky, and I'd have to do it a lot. (Also, I don't think it's financially reasonable for me to add a 50-300 to my 100-400GM and 70-200 GM2, or for that matter a 16-35/4 to the 16-35 GM2).
I would recommend the Tamron 28-200. I have taken it with me on a snowboarding trip in Ski Dolomiti and never felt the need to go wider than 28mm when on the mountain. The speed of this lens vs the newer 25-200 and the Sigma 20-200 is the reason to go with the 28-200. Photos from the trip were mainly taken with the 28-200.
https://www.flickr.com/gp/anitacola/ui2E2jjRu3
For shooting action on the mountain, I personally find the FE85 to be a great choice, and would recommend this as a second lens. It has enough reach for your approaching subject, and tracks tenaciously even on...Show more →
Thank you. Some nice photos there.
I've been thinking for a long time about the 28-200, before the T25-200 and S20-200 came up. But I always ended up deciding that 28mm is too narrow and I'd be swapping lenses way too often.
Interesting about the 85mm. Gotta say, when I'm skiing and touring with friends, it's hard to use a fixed FL. I never know what and how I'll need to frame.
---------------------------------------------
AmbientMike wrote:
Is 20-200 going to give you fantastic iq vs 24-105? Probably not, on such a wide-ranging zoom. And 25 on the 25-200 a little worse on the wide end vs 24-105, 14mm helps doubt 25-200 has much better iq though. Generally have to accept compromises or carry more gear
Very good point. Thing is, I wasn't in love with the IQ of the 24-105, compared to the 16-35 GM and the 70-200 GM. But at least 20-200 would give me lots more options without lens changes.
---------------------------------------------
dakel wrote:
My solution would be Sony 16-35 PZ + Tamron 50-300. This is what I use for hiking.
This is a strong solution for hiking. For skitouring, changing lenses is more tricky, and I'd have to do it a lot. (Also, I don't think it's financially reasonable for me to add a 50-300 to my 100-400GM and 70-200 GM2, or for that matter a 16-35/4 to the 16-35 GM2).
Mar 04, 2026 at 02:32 PM
p.1 #10Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
patotts wrote:
I'd get something light and longer, shooting in snow you'll have plenty of light. Both La Grave and Lofoton offers steep terrain - you need to keep your gear light and minimal.
Are you going for touring/skiing or for taking photos?
Indeed. I've gone for the 20-200 because I expect I won't need to shoot it very often below f8.
I'm going for touring /skiing to both, but in Lofoten I'll have some time for landscape photography early mornings or evenings, so I'll also take the better lenses. (The group in Lofoten, as opposed to La Grave, is also probably slower than me both on the up and the down, so in principle I could also carry the heavier lenses if I thought they're absolutely needed for an image).
I'd get something light and longer, shooting in snow you'll have plenty of light. Both La Grave and Lofoton offers steep terrain - you need to keep your gear light and minimal.
Are you going for touring/skiing or for taking photos?
Indeed. I've gone for the 20-200 because I expect I won't need to shoot it very often below f8.
I'm going for touring /skiing to both, but in Lofoten I'll have some time for landscape photography early mornings or evenings, so I'll also take the better lenses. (The group in Lofoten, as opposed to La Grave, is also probably slower than me both on the up and the down, so in principle I could also carry the heavier lenses if I thought they're absolutely needed for an image).
Mar 04, 2026 at 02:38 PM
p.1 #11Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
I haven't used it in person, but the Sigma 20-200 looks very tempting, at least on paper. I sure could have used it earlier today in Basque country - I had only a 35mm prime on my (new) a7V, but I surely could have used something wider as well as longer. At 550 gr it seems like a good fit, I'm going to research it a bit more myself.
Mar 04, 2026 at 05:25 PM
p.1 #12Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
jaggedhorizon wrote:
Are you going for touring/skiing or for taking photos?Indeed. I've gone for the 20-200 because I expect I won't need to shoot it very often below f8.
I'm going for touring /skiing to both, but in Lofoten I'll have some time for landscape photography early mornings or evenings, so I'll also take the better lenses. (The group in Lofoten, as opposed to La Grave, is also probably slower than me both on the up and the down, so in principle I could also carry the heavier lenses if I thought they're absolutely needed for an image).
If you’re mainly doing landscape, that really makes sense. I really enjoy the action shots and getting some separation of foreground from background, so the 28-200 is more compelling for my use case. If I need to go wider, I typically take a multi-shot panorama. This can work well in the mountains, but I don’t do it much, as I “see in telephoto” far more than “seeing in wide angle”.
Anyway, enjoy the new glass. Both Sigma and Tamron make some excellent travel zooms and we are lucky to have such a richness of choices.
patotts wrote
I'd get something light and longer, shooting in snow you'll have plenty of light. Both La Grave and Lofoton offers steep terrain - you need to keep your gear light and minimal.Are you going for touring/skiing or for taking photos?
I'm going for touring /skiing to both, but in Lofoten I'll have some time for landscape photography early mornings or evenings, so I'll also take the better lenses. (The group in Lofoten, as opposed to La Grave, is also probably slower than me both on the up and the down, so in principle I could also carry the heavier lenses if I thought they're absolutely needed for an image).
If you’re mainly doing landscape, that really makes sense. I really enjoy the action shots and getting some separation of foreground from background, so the 28-200 is more compelling for my use case. If I need to go wider, I typically take a multi-shot panorama. This can work well in the mountains, but I don’t do it much, as I “see in telephoto” far more than “seeing in wide angle”.
Anyway, enjoy the new glass. Both Sigma and Tamron make some excellent travel zooms and we are lucky to have such a richness of choices.
Mar 04, 2026 at 11:56 PM
p.1 #13Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
jaggedhorizon wrote:
https://www.flickr.com/gp/anitacola/ui2E2jjRu3
For shooting action on the mountain, I personally find the FE85 to be a great choice, and would recommend this as a second lens. It has enough reach for your approaching subject, and tracks tenaciously even on a non-sports body like the A7RV. As an added bonus, you get a different look than the 70-200GMii without the bulk. I own both, but the majority of my on-mountain action shots are taken with the FE85.Thank you. Some nice photos there.
I've been thinking for a long time about the 28-200, before the T25-200 and S20-200 came up. But I always ended up deciding that 28mm is too narrow and I'd be swapping lenses way too often.
Interesting about the 85mm. Gotta say, when I'm skiing and touring with friends, it's hard to use a fixed FL. I never know what and how I'll need to frame.
---------------------------------------------
Thanks!
Regarding the 85mm, I feel its real home is in the mountains. For framing, you have so much mountain that you can just back up or go forward with so much more freedom and speed on skis or a snowboard than by foot. And you have all that space - because you’re in the mountains. And without a doubt, it is better at capturing skiers and riders in motion better than any superzoom.
The nearly all of the on-mountain shots in this album from last winter except the tailgate party at the end are taken with the FE85.
https://flickr.com/photos/53775612@N00/sets/72177720322831486
Newenglandrocks wrote
I would recommend the Tamron 28-200. I have taken it with me on a snowboarding trip in Ski Dolomiti and never felt the need to go wider than 28mm when on the mountain. The speed of this lens vs the newer 25-200 and the Sigma 20-200 is the reason to go with the 28-200. Photos from the trip were mainly taken with the 28-200.https://www.flickr.com/gp/anitacola/ui2E2jjRu3
For shooting action on the mountain, I personally find the FE85 to be a great choice, and would recommend this as a second lens. It has enough reach for your approaching subject, and tracks tenaciously even on a non-sports body like the A7RV. As an added bonus, you get a different look than the 70-200GMii without the bulk. I own both, but the majority of my on-mountain action shots are taken with the FE85.
I've been thinking for a long time about the 28-200, before the T25-200 and S20-200 came up. But I always ended up deciding that 28mm is too narrow and I'd be swapping lenses way too often.
Interesting about the 85mm. Gotta say, when I'm skiing and touring with friends, it's hard to use a fixed FL. I never know what and how I'll need to frame.
---------------------------------------------
Thanks!
Regarding the 85mm, I feel its real home is in the mountains. For framing, you have so much mountain that you can just back up or go forward with so much more freedom and speed on skis or a snowboard than by foot. And you have all that space - because you’re in the mountains. And without a doubt, it is better at capturing skiers and riders in motion better than any superzoom.
The nearly all of the on-mountain shots in this album from last winter except the tailgate party at the end are taken with the FE85.
https://flickr.com/photos/53775612@N00/sets/72177720322831486
Mar 05, 2026 at 12:10 AM
p.1 #14Skitouring in Lofoten and La Grave: which zoom?
Newenglandrocks wrote:
https://www.flickr.com/gp/anitacola/ui2E2jjRu3
For shooting action on the mountain, I personally find the FE85 to be a great choice, and would recommend this as a second lens. It has enough reach for your approaching subject, and tracks tenaciously even on a non-sports body like the A7RV. As an added bonus, you get a different look than the 70-200GMii without the bulk. I own both, but the majority of my on-mountain action shots are taken with the FE85.Thank you. Some nice photos there.
I've been thinking for a long time about the 28-200, before the T25-200 and S20-200 came up. But I always ended up deciding that 28mm is too narrow and I'd be swapping lenses way too often.
Interesting about the 85mm. Gotta say, when I'm skiing and touring with friends, it's hard to use a fixed FL. I never know what and how I'll need to frame.
---------------------------------------------Thanks!
Regarding the 85mm, I feel its real home is in the mountains. For framing, you have so much mountain that you can just back up or go forward with so much more freedom and speed on skis or a snowboard than by foot. And you have all that space - because you’re in the mountains. And without a doubt, it is better at capturing skiers and riders in motion better than any superzoom.
The nearly all of the on-mountain shots in this album from last winter except the tailgate party at the end are taken with the FE85.
https://flickr.com/photos/53775612@N00/sets/72177720322831486
Nice series of powder skiing in the woods. Seems like good times.
jaggedhorizon wrote
Newenglandrocks wrote
I would recommend the Tamron 28-200. I have taken it with me on a snowboarding trip in Ski Dolomiti and never felt the need to go wider than 28mm when on the mountain. The speed of this lens vs the newer 25-200 and the Sigma 20-200 is the reason to go with the 28-200. Photos from the trip were mainly taken with the 28-200.https://www.flickr.com/gp/anitacola/ui2E2jjRu3
For shooting action on the mountain, I personally find the FE85 to be a great choice, and would recommend this as a second lens. It has enough reach for your approaching subject, and tracks tenaciously even on a non-sports body like the A7RV. As an added bonus, you get a different look than the 70-200GMii without the bulk. I own both, but the majority of my on-mountain action shots are taken with the FE85.
I've been thinking for a long time about the 28-200, before the T25-200 and S20-200 came up. But I always ended up deciding that 28mm is too narrow and I'd be swapping lenses way too often.
Interesting about the 85mm. Gotta say, when I'm skiing and touring with friends, it's hard to use a fixed FL. I never know what and how I'll need to frame.
---------------------------------------------
Regarding the 85mm, I feel its real home is in the mountains. For framing, you have so much mountain that you can just back up or go forward with so much more freedom and speed on skis or a snowboard than by foot. And you have all that space - because you’re in the mountains. And without a doubt, it is better at capturing skiers and riders in motion better than any superzoom.
The nearly all of the on-mountain shots in this album from last winter except the tailgate party at the end are taken with the FE85.
https://flickr.com/photos/53775612@N00/sets/72177720322831486
Nice series of powder skiing in the woods. Seems like good times.
Mar 05, 2026 at 04:27 AM