70-200 2.8 question

<p>I asked a similar question in the travel forum but got little response. I am leaving for a trip this weekend ( galapagos ) and I loaded my bag with my basic gear. 5D2, 40D, 24-105, 50 1.4 and 70-200 2.8. I realize that the 70-200 2.8 really makes the bag feel heavy on such a long trip ( 3 flights, it will obviously be in my carry on )<br>

<br /> So my question is this. Should I just leave the 70-200 at home? I am not traveling to just shoot photos, I want to enjoy the trip. Or should I consider a lighter alternative on the long end. Maybe purchase a 70-300? I really don't use long lenses often so I hate to purchase a long slow lens I will probably hardly ever use. Any other thoughts would be appreciated.</p>

<p> Photo.net is a gold mine of information, but you have to mine it. Go to the little search window in the upper right, and input "lenses galapagos" for your answer.</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/search/?cx=000753226439295166877%3A0gyn0h9z85o&cof=FORID%3A11&ie=UTF-8&section=all&q=lenses+galapagos&filter=0&sa.x=8&sa.y=11&sa=Search#1473</p>

<p>Personally, if I was going to the Galapagos I'd bring the longest lens I could. If I didn't think I'd use it much after the trip, I'd consider renting one. <br>

More specifically, If I wanted to lighten my load, I'd consider taking just the 28-300 L lens and leaving the other lens at home. I've found this lens although heavy to be a great walk around, general purpose, lens. I agree with the review here: <br>

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-300mm-f-3.5-5.6-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx<br>

" The 28-300 L is the best Canon <strong>do-everything-with-one-lens</strong> lens available. "<br>

<br /></p>

<p>I might just get by with the 24-105. The 5D2 will allow for a lot of cropping. I'd rather do that than use the 40D for cropping purposes.</p>

<p>Longer is better for wildlife, but the hike will kill you with all that gear.</p>

<p>I traded in my 70-200 f/2.8 and got a 135 f/2. It's much smaller and lighter.</p>

<p>The age old question for me. Sometimes (1) I travel and I want a camera; (2) sometimes I backpack and want a smaller camera. (3) Sometimes I am traveling specifically to photograph. I handle each of these situations differently. For (1) I take my G10 with or without a small tripod or travel pod. For (2) an Olympus shock proof water proof p&S. For 3) two bodies, a bunch of lenses, tripod, yadiyadiya. Sometimes more, sometimes less as concerns lenses. What I think I am going to shoot and the nature of the trip etc. On this type of trip I usually find more is better as when I dont bring a particular lens I find I want it.</p>

<p>Too many times when I am going on a trip you are describing where my main objective is not photography, I find that carrying lots of equipment becomes a burden for me with regards to the rest of the trip. With my g10 I still get the shot, albeit that getting the shot was not the primary purpose of my trip. Hope this helps. </p>

<p>Ed, my thinking exactly, I plan to use the 5D2 with the 24-105 most of the time. The 40D will mostly serve as a back up camera that will probably see little use or I may put the 50mm on it for my wife to shoot with.</p>

<p>I'd leave the 40D and the 50/1.4. I'd bring the 70-200/2.8 for sure. Do you have a comfortable backpack?</p>

<p>Arie that's the other option I considered. As to bag, I was planning on just using my urban disguise 35. Should I consider a slingshot or some backpack instead? I am usually pretty comfortable with the UD.</p>

<p>The Urban Disguise is a satchel-type bag with a shoulderstrap, right? That'll make the shoulders hurt for sure. How about a proper daypack with a waist belt shoulder harness. That'll make a world of difference.</p>

<p>Yes its a shoulder bag, What would you suggest for a backpack?</p>

<p>Well there are lots of choices. You could go for a photo backpack<br>

http://products.lowepro.com/catalog/Camera,14.htm<br>

I often just use a 30L hiking daypack and I keep my lenses in soft cases. 30 liters is enough capacity for your camera gear, water bottle, sunscreen, windbreaker etc.</p>

<p>Your backup should be a tiny P&S, like an Elph, not a 40D. 5DmkII + 40D is like you're getting ready to shoot a wedding, not going island hopping and hiking through the Galapagos.</p>

<p>I vote for 5DmkII + 24-105/4L IS + 70-200/2.8L (don't know if you have the IS version or not). If you don't bring both zooms you're going to kick yourself. If you know your way around the 50/1.4 and like living dangerously, substitute that for the 24-105 and save more weight. In fact, I like that idea a lot. A tiny P&S will do a pretty good job of wide-angle if you really need it.</p>

<p>Great advice! that is actually what I am going to do. I decided on taking the 5D2 24-105 and 70-200 (non is ) I will have an underwater P/S as a backup/water camera. I will probably take the 50 along since its so small. I am going to take a look at some backpacks to see if I like the feel better. I love the UD 35, it fits this gear perfectly but I never used it on a long hike so a backpack may be a better option. </p>

<p> </p>

Tommy, since you mentioned you don't do much long work I was going to suggest the EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM since it's pretty inexpensive and halfway decent. You can probably pick up a used one for under US$200. Also, I have the 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS with my 40D, 17-85, 50 f/1.8, 35 f/2 and P&S in a Domke F-3 backpack, which is very comfortable and inconspicuous. Have fun & take many-a-gig of storage.

<p>Just get a 200mm f2.8 - much lighter than a 70-200mm and will give you some telephoto pull if you need it (you probably will) with your 24-105. The 70-200 is a monster.</p>

<p>My suggestion would be: if the 70-200 fits in your shoulder bag, bring it. Also bring a small backpack, not photo gear, just a regular packsack, which is a necessity anyways. The packsack's strap will help cushion your shoulder.</p>

<p>Then, if your 70-200 is really starting to kill your shoulder, pull it out of the shoulder bag, roll it up in a towel/sweater, put it in the packsack, and give your shoulder.</p>

<p>Or... just mount the lens and carry your camera with the neck strap, it will be a very useful lens for a lot of situations.</p>

<p>I see Robin just gave the same answer I had in mind. If you could rent one, the 200mm 2.8 would be perfect with that 24-105. You could bring your 50mm as well.</p>

<p>Been to the Galapagos...fantastic trip. You get close to most wildlife except for flying birds. You rarely walk for long distances at one time, but if weight is really an issue, I would take the 40D & the 50mm, and add some wide angle for the scenery...perhaps the 18-200 for both the reach and the wide. then pack the P&S for a backup. That is my basic travel package, but I also add the 10-22. When I took the Galapagos trip, I lugged the 70-200 2.8, and one of the other people took their 24-105. She did better than I. If you take that one, use it on the 40D. The 5D is a lot of weight, and if you just want travel photos, the 40D will do just fine.</p>

<p>I used to have a 70-200 2.8 non IS and realized I had up to 168 with my 24-105 on my 40D. With that much overlap I couldn't see keeping the 70-200 so I purchased a 100-400 f4 IS instead, it's basically the same size and weight. The IS makes up for the slower lens. I agree with some of the other posts on taking the 5D and 40D, too many cameras for what you described you want to do. I would take the 5D, 24-105, and a 100-400. A G9 or G10 would be a great backup camera. Again, personal choice.</p>

<p>Another vote for leaving the 70-200mm at home. I used to take it on trips, but I didn't use it that much so now it stays at home. I take (and love) my 200mm f/2.8L II -- small and light and noticably sharper than the 70-200mm f/2.8L.</p>

<p>If you still have time, I would suggest picking up both the 70-200mm f4 IS and the 1.4x extender. The lens is excellent and significantly lighter than the 2.8 version. All you lose is one f-stop. Since the 5D2 is low noise even in the higher ISOs, that should not be an issue.<br />Combined with the 24-105, you'll probably have the lenses for all your needs. I second the suggestions that the backup should be the G10, perhaps with a Lensmate-type attachment so you can use a polarizing filter.</p>

<p>I travel a lot with couple of lenses and I recently purchased 5D II and then had a long distance travel to mountainous areas with 70-200/2.8L IS lens plus another wide angle lens. I believe 70-200/2.8 is a very useful lens, with 5D II, you really don't need another 40D body.</p>

<p>I vote for 5DmkII with 24-105/4L IS and 40D with 70-200/2.8L IS.<br /> 70-200/2.8L is a must have for all photographer that are in need of an all-around lens, the weight is nicely balanced with 40D. You will not regret.<br /></p>

<p> </p>

<p>The original poster is not asking for equipment recommendations. He's asking <strong>which of his existing gear</strong> he should take on a trip. If I had to buy something new every time I went somewhere, I'd be broke.</p>

<p>take all and use your 70-200 case on your waist belt(if you wear any). Or you can purchase a seperate case for belt to carry aroung, domke and lowerpro have some. I found my self in the same dilemma when I went to costa rica two years ago. I had 30d, 17-55 f2.8 is, ef 50mm f1.2l, 24mm f1.4l, 10-22, and 70-200, 580ex and tripod. I found my self asking the same questions here, about back pack which lenses. I took my tamrac super pro 17 shoulder bag and purchased tamrac explorer backpack and took all my gear. I ended up using it all. Of course, I left a couple of lenses in the hotels safe some days.</p>