Reagan wrote:
Ram
Take a Fuji camera and their 14/2.8 and the Fuji 55-200
also a tripod it would all weigh less than 1 Nikon body
Waiting for the flames
R
Between you pushing Fuji and me pushing the AFS 200-500, we may need to find a new place to hang out
Reagan wrote:
Ram
Take a Fuji camera and their 14/2.8 and the Fuji 55-200
also a tripod it would all weigh less than 1 Nikon body
Waiting for the flames
Thanks Chris. I don't own the 200-500 but I see the point in having a tele zoom for coverage.
I have used my 12-24 DX lens on my D610 and 18-24 range on FX has been useful in the past.
The widest in my kit would be 16mm f3.5 fish eye but wouldn't offer flexibility like you mentioned.
I do think taking a couple of AF lenses would help cover lot of ground though.
Chris Dees wrote:
Ram, I would say super wide, mid-tele and as long as you can get/afford.
For me this would be an "AF" trip, 18-35G, 70-200E and 200-500E + TC1.4x
Chris Dees wrote:
Ram, I would say super wide, mid-tele and as long as you can get/afford.
For me this would be an "AF" trip, 18-35G, 70-200E and 200-500E + TC1.4x
This is how I end up on most trips where I desire maximum flexibility for least bulk/weight. I know I can also make it work with MF lenses. When traveling with others, zooms save time switching lenses too. While it would be great to also bring some MF lenses for the times when I'm out solo, that just ain't gonna happen when I need to fly somewhere. Before I sold the 17-35 as an MF zoom to Chuong, my travel set was 17-35, 24-120, 70-300 (with a D800 an DX crop I cheat my way to 450mm). Today the 16-35 replaces the 17-35 (a little bulky compared to the 17-35 but it is what it is), or I bring the fisheye and defish. Maybe I need the 18mm AIS.
But, to answer you question more directly, looking at the lenses you list in your profile,
the 20 or 24
the 75-150 or 80-200
whichever FL you prefer from 24-75/80, if you feel the need to fill the gap here
and yes, a long FL if you're very serious about wildlife. I had a 300 f4 with 1.4x back then, even then felt I needed more FL at times for elk, moose, and bison shots.
pbraymond wrote:
This is how I end up on most trips where I desire maximum flexibility for least bulk/weight. I know I can also make it work with MF lenses. When traveling with others, zooms save time switching lenses too. While it would be great to also bring some MF lenses for the times when I'm out solo, that just ain't gonna happen when I need to fly somewhere. Before I sold the 17-35 as an MF zoom to Chuong, my travel set was 17-35, 24-120, 70-300 (with a D800 an DX crop I cheat my way to 450mm). Today the 16-35 replaces the 17-35 (a little bulky compared to the 17-35 but it is what it is), or I bring the fisheye and defish. Maybe I need the 18mm AIS.
But, to answer you question more directly, looking at the lenses you list in your profile,
the 20 or 24
the 75-150 or 80-200
whichever FL you prefer from 24-75/80, if you feel the need to fill the gap here
and yes, a long FL if you're very serious about wildlife. I had a 300 f4 with 1.4x back then, even then felt I needed more FL at times for elk, moose, and bison shots. ...Show more →
I think you have some valid points. I certainly will be travelling in a group and apart from me, there are no other photographers in that group. I am travelling with my cousins most of whom think iPhone is the best camera out there.
I think the 75-150 is definitely coming with me. I can pack the 16mm f3.5 AI as well.May be I will take the 12-24 f4 and consider taking me 300mm f2.8 with couple of TCs. I can pack my 500mm f4 P along with couple of TCs (1.6 vs 1.4 not decided), but not sure how heavy overall they all will be together considering that 500mm f4 P is 6.6lbs where as the 200-500mm is close to 5 lbs and the 300mm f2.8 is close to 5.9 lbs.
Its the long end that I am worried I might be short.
I will decide to carry my tripod as well since I think I can fit them all into a backpack and check-in.
Places like LensRental will ship to your destination, so if you want the 200-500 (or longer telephoto!) to rent, there's another option for having one there.
ramkumar999 wrote:
I think you have some valid points. I certainly will be travelling in a group and apart from me, there are no other photographers in that group. I am travelling with my cousins most of whom think iPhone is the best camera out there.
I think the 75-150 is definitely coming with me. I can pack the 16mm f3.5 AI as well.May be I will take the 12-24 f4 and consider taking me 300mm f2.8 with couple of TCs. I can pack my 500mm f4 P along with couple of TCs (1.6 vs 1.4 not decided), but not sure how heavy overall they all will be together considering that 500mm f4 P is 6.6lbs where as the 200-500mm is close to 5 lbs and the 300mm f2.8 is close to 5.9 lbs.
Its the long end that I am worried I might be short.
I will decide to carry my tripod as well since I think I can fit them all into a backpack and check-in....Show more →
NightOwl Cat wrote:
Places like LensRental will ship to your destination, so if you want the 200-500 (or longer telephoto!) to rent, there's another option for having one there.
Thank you for that tip. How do you return them? I saw the rent for 200-500mm around $80 for 4 days which is absolutely cheap.
ramkumar999 wrote:
Thank you for that tip. How do you return them? I saw the rent for 200-500mm around $80 for 4 days which is absolutely cheap.
Take them to the closest Fed Ex or UPS place and they are one the way
Prepaid sticker comes with the rental just put it in the same box and put the sticker on
I would call them first
Very nice people
