Burnsie

Now this young lady (my granddaughter) makes it a little more challenging to capture some action with the RP.

My Canon RP is not the greatest at sports pictures, but this little guy (my grandson) makes it fun and easy. :)

William Michael provides some great advice here. I to have a 7Dii and for low light, I almost always bring a couple of primes. I really like the pancake lenses than Canon came out with. I use both the 24 mm EF-S and the 40mm EF lenses. 2.8 is fast and the iso on a 7Dii can be bumped up significantly and still produce some great images, especially if you shoot raw and edit in LR. I have debated going to full frame, but have so much invested in my crop sensor lenses, I am reluctant to pull the trigger yet. Especially after reading the reviews of the 6Dii and it doesn't seem to be that much of an improvement in dynamic range. I do love the 7Dii. Best camera yet I have gotten in a crop sensor Canon format.

<p>Thanks Dave and Jeff. For the reasons you gave, I plan to have both my 55-250 and the superzoom out to 1200. The Superzoom is good but not great, but I have nothing else even getting close to 1200. On my crop body 60D, the 55-250 gets me to 400 mm equivalent.<br> That inexpensive lens actually does quite well at the max end. (At least my copy does.) So I should get decent pics up to 400 mm and will crop some if needed to get an even closer high quality shot. Anything we get with the superzoom from 400 to 1200 equivalent will just be bonus. <br> Given the feedback on the superwide, I am bringing it. And my 24-105 will flll the gap between 22 and 55. So 3 lenses it is.<br> Thanks.</p>

<p>Thanks for the good feedback on cruise ship lighting and photo ops. What I suspected but was not certain. <br> If I don't need 2.8 on the ship, I am likely to leave behind the 17-55 since it is fairly heavy and I can cover the focal range with my 10-22 and 24-105. All 3 lenses are good copies and I get good shots nearly all the time from any of those lenses.<br> One clarification: The tripod was not for while on the ship. It was going to be for when we are on land (Denali in late evenings / early mornings, when we are on 1 of the 2 photo tours. (Time lapse of night skies, low light low ISO shots, etc.) And it's pretty easy to pack and carry via backpack (collapses to 13 inches and only weighs a couple of pounds). Once on the ship, it will get stowed away in our cabin.</p> <p> </p>

<p>So my wife and I are finally checking off one more item on our bucket list and are headed to Alaska from mid to late August this year for a 12 day rail/cruise tour with Princess Cruises. First cruise for us. First and very likely our only time in Alaska. We are obviously excited. getting old is not so bad it seems. :)<br> We will fly into Flagstaff, and be with the Princess cruise group via bus / train to Denali, McKinley, Whittier/Anchorage, and then on the ship seeing Skagway, Juneau, and Ketchikan as well as seeing glaciers on the way. At least 2 small group photography tours already planned and several other excursions along the way. I will probably shoot far too many pictures! :)<br> I am trying to decide on what camera equipment to bring with me on the trip. Here is what I have available.<br> Canon SuperZoom SX50 IS (12MP) (24-1200 mm zoom equivalent)<br />Apple iPhone 6+ (8MP)<br />Canon 60D (18MP)<br /><br />Canon EF-S 10-22 f3.5-4.5 <br />Canon EF 24-105 f/4 L IS<br />Canon EF-S 55-250 f/4.0-5.6 IS II<br> Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS<br />Canon EF 100 f/2.8 Macro<br /><br />I want travel as light as possible but also shoot as much as possible at best quality. I know, it is impossible. :) <br> I want to pack it all in my Domke F-2 bag so I am looking to leave somethings behind. (I am bringing my smaller tripod with ballhead also.)<br> My plan is to have my wife use the Canon SX50 to get distance shots of wildlife, scenery, etc. using that 1200 mm effective zoom. Since most of our work ends up on my computer screen for our enjoyment (minimal printing) and I use Lightroom to post process everything, I am not too worried about the image quality of that little sensor. It beats lugging a large zoom lens around.<br> I find myself using my iPhone 6+ a lot now for up close people shots both indoors and outdoors. It has essentially replaced my DSLR for spur of the moment shots. So that is going for sure also.<br> My current DSLR lens plan is to leave behind the 17-55 and the 100 macro lenses. I can easily store the first 3 lenses, the 60D and the Superzoom in the F-2 bag, with my batteries, filters, etc. <br> Two choices to make: <br> 1) Leave the 10-22 behind?<br> 2) Leave the 24-105 behind and bring the 17-55 instead, since it pairs well with the 55-250?<br> Would I use the 10-22 that much on deck or outdoors or are we so far away from stuff that the wide angle is not really needed? An alternative for wide angle shots is to use panoramic mode on my iPhone. Not as great quality as my 10-22, but one less lens to carry. Of course if I have a chance to shoot a night scene Aurora Borealis and I needed that 10-22 and don't have it, I will be very bummed. But do I need it for that remote possibility, or can I get by with just the 24-105? people who traveled to Alaska - did you use their super wides that much?<br> Regarding the 17-55: Can I get by without a 2.8 lens indoors on a cruise ship? Not sure what lighting levels are like. The 60D is ok at ISO 800 and hand held I am usually ok at f4.0 for decent light levels, but I hav eno idea what the cruise ship lighting will be like - dimly lit church or bright rooms? I prefer the 24-105 for minimal lens switching especially if it is rainy when we are on land. <br> Any thoughts or feedback is appreciated.<br> Thanks.</p>

<p>I have a 60D and often shoot indoor church scenes or night shots, that require low light capability, as you are suggesting. These days, I usually use my Canon 17-55 2.8 zoom lens, although I used to use prime lenses at 1.8 aperture (28, 50, 85, etc.) But I find these days it is easier to just walk around with my 17-55. </p><div></div>