Lens recommendation for vacation

[san~man]

Planning to head to San Diego / Anaheim in Dec, and wanted some recommendations as to what lenses to take along.

Tentatively:
Sea World
San Diego Zoo
Legoland

Disney
Universal

I have:
24-70 II
16-35 III
70-200 IS II

Questions:
1. I'm trying to leave the 70-200 at home, do you think that's a wise idea (meaning will I miss it)? I know I'd need it at the zoo, but other than that, to me it's questionable

2. Tripod? Necessary or not?


Thanks for the help everyone

[are0lies]

Personally, I would not leave the 24-70 behind. As for a tripod, remember that alot of places don't allow them. I have a monopod, which makes it easier to use. Also take your 70-200, as there will be areas in San Diego that you will want to zoom in on. Going into any of the venues, your 24-70 is the one to have. Enjoy your stay. Just to let you know, I understand that the orca shows have been eliminated, but you can still see them in their pools.

[sygazelle]

It would be hard to give up any of those lenses. As soon as you leave one behind, that's the one you will need.

I used to have that anxiety. What to take? What to leave behind? Switching lenses. What a pain.

I threw money at the problem and just bought a Sony 6500 with an 18-200 lens. 18 to 200 in a single lens covers most everything I'd want on a vacation.

Throw them all in the bag. Have fun.

[san~man]

Originally Posted by are0lies

Personally, I would not leave the 24-70 behind. As for a tripod, remember that alot of places don't allow them. I have a monopod, which makes it easier to use. Also take your 70-200, as there will be areas in San Diego that you will want to zoom in on. Going into any of the venues, your 24-70 is the one to have. Enjoy your stay. Just to let you know, I understand that the orca shows have been eliminated, but you can still see them in their pools.

I hope not, my 6 yr old has "graduated" from dinosaurs to sharks and killer whales. My co-worker went last month and said they still had the orcas, but I didn't ask if there were shows or not. That would be a bummer.

Does anyone know specifically where tripods are not allowed?

Thanks to everyone.

[tracer bullet]

I'd leave the 16-35 at home, IMO it's more for interesting landscape shots. I love mine to death but I don't think I'd vacation with it. Agreed 24-70 for sure, it'd be general walking around. bring the 70-200 as well, if you have room for it. You don't necessarily have to take it out each day but I do think there are days you'd want it - the zoo would be an example of where it'd be a good one. Might even be the only one you'd need there.

[tcphoto]

I would never carry around a DSLR while on vacation, the Canon G15 is my vacation camera. Are you trying to relax and have fun or is it work oriented? If you must, I would only take the 24-70II and certainly not the 70-200/2.8 which is a beast and will get plenty of attention from potential thieves.

[Rikx1M]

All great lenses and part of a working kit...for vaca I only take a 10mm and a 28-300. With fullframe sensor I can change it to DX and get reach up to 450mm.

[are0lies]

Another idea is to go to find pictures of some of the areas you want to go to, and decide for yourself which lenses the photographer used. While in San Diego, if you have time, try to take a visit Balboa Park; if for nothing else but the architecture. It is a row of museums.

[tracer bullet]

Originally Posted by are0lies

Another idea is to go to find pictures of some of the areas you want to go to, and decide for yourself which lenses the photographer used.

Good idea!

[bosstones]

If you do attend any shows at Sea World or in general at the zoo, you might want the telephoto that the 70-200 brings. This is just me, but at aquarium type places, I tend to go wide/close to take pix instead tanks and the ability to go ultra wide also makes it easier if you pix of the family w/ critters in the background if you are in a congested or tight space. For zoos, addt'l telephoto has always been useful so I bring my 70-200.

24-70L is a great lens and provides a decent wide angle w/ more telephoto than the 16-35L. I guess a question would be how much focal length do you normally shoot with?

Also, where will you be staying? You could always bring all 3 and leave behind 1 or 2 at your place of shelter. If a hotel, lock them up in your luggage.

[san~man]

Originally Posted by bosstones

If you do attend any shows at Sea World or in general at the zoo, you might want the telephoto that the 70-200 brings. This is just me, but at aquarium type places, I tend to go wide/close to take pix instead tanks and the ability to go ultra wide also makes it easier if you pix of the family w/ critters in the background if you are in a congested or tight space. For zoos, addt'l telephoto has always been useful so I bring my 70-200.

24-70L is a great lens and provides a decent wide angle w/ more telephoto than the 16-35L. I guess a question would be how much focal length do you normally shoot with?

Also, where will you be staying? You could always bring all 3 and leave behind 1 or 2 at your place of shelter. If a hotel, lock them up in your luggage.

We haven't quite decided on a hotel yet, but I'm thinking I have to bring the bazooka, if only for the zoo. Like you recommended, I'll leave it at the hotel when it's not needed.

Thanks for the tips.

[bosstones]

Originally Posted by san~man

We haven't quite decided on a hotel yet, but I'm thinking I have to bring the bazooka, if only for the zoo. Like you recommended, I'll leave it at the hotel when it's not needed.

Thanks for the tips.

Np. I travel a fair amount for work and always try to balance what camera and/or lens(es) I bring if I have a camera pass or think I'll have time\use for a camera.

Btw, if there are indoor tanks/aquariums/critter displays, you can hold your camera/lens up to the glass to minimize indoor light reflections (eg display lights) off the glass. Examples attached...both pix were taken of things inside displays where there were lots of glare on the glass. I have a friend who does some pretty cool stuff in the air and uses a piece of black neoprene folded around his lenses to minimize/eliminate glare as well. I would recommend having a UV filter or some other protective layer between the actual camera lens and display glass, though.

[Rikx1M]

Originally Posted by Railgun

On an FX lens, that makes no sense. It's the exact same image, you just have less AOV to work with so you lose the edges. You get no more reach doing it that way.

You can crop a proper FX image to a DX size and get exactly the same result with exactly the same resolution. That's all that the camera does when using DX mode on an FX lens...does that work for you.

Yeah, I understand that a DX crop eliminates 20-30 % of image so it appears like you've zoomed in...crop factor of 1.5 on Nikon, 1.6 on Canon. It just makes it easier to have a cropped/zoomed in image without having to spend time photo editing the image.

You can tell also by the fact that a FX/fullframe RAW file from D800 is roughly 41MBs while a DX image is only 18MBs.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by san~man

Planning to head to San Diego / Anaheim in Dec, and wanted some recommendations as to what lenses to take along.

Tentatively:
Sea World
San Diego Zoo
Legoland

Disney
Universal

I have:
24-70 II
16-35 III
70-200 IS II

Questions:
1. I'm trying to leave the 70-200 at home, do you think that's a wise idea (meaning will I miss it)? I know I'd need it at the zoo, but other than that, to me it's questionable

2. Tripod? Necessary or not?


Thanks for the help everyone

I assume that you have a modern DSLR body to go with your excellent L-series lenses. Given that, you'll not need a tripod. Simply run the ISO up to wherever it needs to go, including ISO 12800. There's too much light in that area for most astrophotography.

If you don't take the 70-200 and a 1.4x TC-III, you'll miss tons at the San Diego Zoo and Sea World.

You need the 24-70mm for walk-around. That leaves the 16-35mm, which is your lightest lens. I'd only leave it our if your bag is too tight with it.

Looking at my shots from Disney, including Animal Kingdom and Universal, about half were with my 70-200mm and half were with my 24-105mm.

Some people recommend traveling light. I've invested in full-frame bodies and top level lenses, so I think, "Why do that, if I'm not going to use them to document my trips?"

Consider making a vanity book when you get back. Your family will love it and so will travel companions, if you have any. Having a book in the back of your mind as you shoot, will improve your shooting. When a relative comes to visit, one of the first things they do is look through my latest books. My friends tell me that visitors to their homes really enjoy looking through the books. It'll up your game.

Dave

[san~man]

Thanks for those tips Jeff, I have a B&W filter for protection.

Thanks Dave, good advice as always. Any problems with the series III extender, I had read up a bunch on some reported problems (may have been the series II)?

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by san~man

...

Thanks Dave, good advice as always. Any problems with the series III extender, I had read up a bunch on some reported problems (may have been the series II)?

Sorry for the slow response.

No, absolutely no problems with either the EF 1.4x or 2.0x TC-III. People used to complain about the 2.0x TC-II not be sharp, but that's fixed.

Waxing Gibbous Moon by David Stephens, on Flickr

[san~man]

I'll probably look into renting one unless the rental cost doesn't make sense

[jmg]

I would bring that 70-200 to Sea World, Legoland and the Zoo, where you can really take some cool shots of the animals and Lego displays.

Disneyland does NOT allow tripods, or even monopods for that matter, because they might see it as a selfie stick, which are also not allowed. It makes me glad I was able to take some long exposures at Disneyland at night with my tripod before the ban.

Anyway, I would bring the 24-70mm to all those places. You might look into renting a 24-105mm for some extra reach. They are very common and affordable rentals. Most of my vacation shots are with my 24-105mm, it's just easier to chase the kids around with.

Sometimes, however, if I'm feeling adventurous, I ONLY take a 35mm f/1.4 prime. It's slightly lighter than the rest and takes nice sharp photos during the day and amazing night photos. Bringing one prime lens forces you to be creative in your framing and it's just easier. Disneyland is great for the 35mm prime because it's lit really nicely at night and that focal length seems to have a more nostalgic feel to it, at least on my Full Frame.

Great tip above about putting that lens right on the glass, I've had good results with that. Having a CPL helps too.

[san~man]

Thanks for all the advice!

It seems we're going to Disney World now, so I'm packing all 3.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by san~man

Thanks for all the advice!

It seems we're going to Disney World now, so I'm packing all 3.

That 300mm will be perfect if you go to the Animal Park.

[peafur]

With fullframe sensor I can change it to DX and get reach up to 450mm.

[John Tanglewood]

Agreed on the 24-70. I have a 35mm 1.4 also, but when it's time for a trip I find the 24-70 goes in my bag.

I've done a 14-day trek to Everest Base Camp, countless excursions, and the 24-70 has come with me on every trip. It's versatile, fast (I use a 2.8), and sharp. It's just a touch heavy. But you cannot beat the practicality of having a nice wide angle whilst at the same time being able to get in for something a little closer.

Originally Posted by jmg

Sometimes, however, if I'm feeling adventurous, I ONLY take a 35mm f/1.4 prime.

Agreed on this 100%