Telezoom for 8 days Hiking in Cappadocia, Help !?...

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by nathaniel_geller, Jan 2, 2013.

  1. I'll go on photo hiking with very expirienced in that region mountain guide in Turkey, Cappadocia for 8 days. We will be compact group of 4 people, so ideal for photoshooting. 1 guide,1 model, 2 photographers. So, Landscapes and some portraits.
    I'm planning to get Canon 5d2 + 16-35 II and 50 1.8. My friend photographer will get 5d2+ Canon 70-300 IS non L and Canon 100mm 2.8 macro, which we intent to use also for portraits. Excellent tripods also. Filters - CPL, we intent to use exposure bracketing. (we don't shoot usually landscapes.)
    10km daily on not so difficult terrains (up to 1700m) My biggest dillema is for the telezoom, which I to bring or buy. Now I have:

    1/ Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II - weight is concern, but more security reasons (unwanted attention getting)
    2/ Canon 70-300 4-5.6 IS non L - At f/16 on tripod I find that 70-200 is better lens. I may be looking too much on image details. Rotating front element - for using CPL
    3/I may get, cause I found 200mm short on FF.:
    1* 1.4x or 2x teleconverter to use with 70-200 2.8 IS II,
    2* Crop body like 60d/7d, which uses the same batteries. I'm not concerned for back up, it's OK to use one 5d2 with my friend.
    3* Another telezoom>200mm. Suggestions? For Canon 100-400 - I'm not convinced whether it's much better than Canon 70-300 at f/16 on a tripod. Also between 35mm and 100mm there will be bigger focal length gap vs. 35 to 70mm.
    What are your suggestions & recomendations to bring/buy ? :) Thank you very much in advance! :)
     
  2. Hello Nathaniel,
    when in Cappadocia, I brought my 24-70 and my 70-200. I had a 50/1.4 with me, too, and a 100 Micro, both of which went largely unused. For wider angles, I preferred using the 24-70 and shooting panoramic photos. I do not have a range as in 70-300 and personally, I haven't missed it. I work with a full frame Nikon.
    Don't worry about unwanted attention - there are so many people with cameras out there that you won't make a difference. ;) If you dig huge landscapes, bring a real wide angle. And don't forget your electric plug converter for chargers; Turkey has European sockets.
    Monika
     
  3. Thank you ,Monika! :) It was helpful to read your experince. On air balloon is 200(300)mm enough on FF?
    We often will be out of the beaten paths, our mountain guide have been there many times since 2001.
    I'm 28 years old,so weight is not big problem. I know that the region is safe, but I'm a little be afraid of gear stealing (therefore I don't prefer to get attention with White lens like 70-200 2.8 IS II ).
    I love 16-35II, it'll be our wide angle lens. Even I'm thinking for Canon 15mm 2.8 fisheye lens and Samyang 14 2.8 as add on for 16-35 II. But the telephoto choice is more difficult, I intend to shoot most of the time with tripod at f/16.

    Nathaniel
     
  4. Don't worry about the ballooning - you'll use your wide angle more than anything else then (unless you intend to go for details before start).
    And don't worry about theft, either. I found all islamic countries to be much safer than any other region so far. But then, I've never had any problems with cameras, anywhere I traveled. Quite the contrary.
     
  5. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    "I'm not concerned for back up, it's OK to use one 5d2 with my friend."​
    I would think again and then re-think, again that statement.
    WW
     
  6. Thank you again for safety impressions for islamic countries, Monika! I saw 2 spectacular ballooning shots made with UWA - Nikon 14-24 @16mm :)
    @ WW It's OK to use one 5d2 with my friend, but I will re-think cause it's important issue. The only bodies of my interest, which I can afford, are Canon 60D/7D. I don't know how good they will be it for landscape work - I think 7D image quality is very similar to T3i/600D.
     
  7. It sounds like you are saying that you're getting the cameras new for the trip?
    If so get them as early as you can and do a lot of shooting with them before you go. This is not only to make sure that they work as they are supposed to, but even more to make sure that you work with them as they are supposed to. Pack the manual, of course, but practice, practice with different controls and so forth before hand if the camera is new to you.
    It's going to be a real drag, in my opinion, if each of you don't cover the range you need. Otherwise you'll be in the same places and each need the same lens at the same time.
    Maybe throw in a 24-105mm for general wide to modest tele coverage, so you can be doing something while waiting for your turn with a lens....
     
  8. I mainly shoot events/portraits and I haven't got so much expirience with landscapes. Except for travel photographies with my favourite Tokina 11-16 on T3i - I love UWA.
    I have 5d2 since 2011 with 24-105 as a kit. I sold the lens and upgrade to 16-35 II + 70-200 2.8 II before an year. 24-105 is excellent for landscapes, but I strongly prefer for my professional work lenses at least with f/2.8 or larger aperture.
     
  9. Sure, that makes sense. The "planning to get" term made me wonder though.
    I find f/4 fast enough for me these days, but different strokes, as they say.
    Have fun.
    One of these days, I am going to make it to Asia Minor myself.
     
  10. Thank you JDM :) f/4 is fast enough, but I usually prefer shallower DOF for Events/Portraits.

    My main dillemma is wheather 200mm reach on FF is enough for Cappadocia or in more generally for landscapes? Is it good idea to get Canon 1.4x III or Canon 2x III telencovertor for such kind a trip ?
     
  11. If it were me and I felt the way you do, I'd get at least the X1.4. This is not a trip you'll probably be making every year.
    I know for me that the 200mm is not enough, which is why I got the EF 100-400mm lens, but that's a handful to carry and is f/4.5-5.6 to boot.
    What about an 85mm f/1.8 as an alternative to the 50mm?
     
  12. I think that may one of the best trips in my life! Thank you again, JDM :)
    I own 85 1.2 II as an alternative to the 50mm, I can borrow 85 1.8. For Landscapes, when using tripod, maybe there will be limited use for 85L II and I didn't include that lens at my first post.
    I want more to get Canon 2x III teleconvertor in order to have more reach (140-400mm). But I'm not convinced wheather the compromise with the image quality is too much in comparison with Canon 1.4x III. Slower autofocus is totally OK for me. I haven't got expirience in that area, how meaningful is the difference between 280mm and 400m on FF for landscapes?
     
  13. I went from a 300mm maximum focal length zoom to the 100-400. I sure wish I'd had the 400mm at the Grand Canyon last March.
    In fact, the manifest (for me, as always) need for even more reach, was the proximate cause of my buying the 100-400mm. The nice thing about the 100-400 is that it is still close enough at the 100mm end to the 70mm, but goes on up to 400.
    I confess I'm a sort of junkie for 500mm and up mirror lenses, and they are very light and easy to pack. However, there are the "donuts" in the OOF and the only f/8 aperture is limiting, not to mention the shallow DOF and fussing with manual focusing.
    I have a huge shoulder bag that holds everything, but on a trip to Egypt I found that it was a blessing that I could leave on the transport, since "hiking" even a couple of hundred meters with it was hernia inducing.
     
  14. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    "I think that may one of the best trips in my life!"​
    The comment about "rethinking" was not about freindship - it was about two eager Photographers seeing the SAME SHOT . . . and having only one camera. . . 'best trips of my life' . . .
    I was recently travelling far, 50days on the hop, recently: my 'Back-up' was a Powershot SX40HS
    "I want more to get Canon 2x III teleconvertor in order to have more reach (140-400mm). But I'm not convinced wheather the compromise with the image quality is too much in comparison with Canon 1.4x III."
    I have a few detailed comments on that - search other posts on that specific topic - but I am nearly running late for a job. . .

    My quick response: the x2.0 and x1.4 are invaluable for getting extra reach and maintaining a light weight minimum lens kit - but to mate with a ZOOM . . . it HAS to be with either the EF70 to 200F/2.8L or the EF70 to 200F/2.8L IS MkII - the latter using the MkIII Tele extenders.
    With your lens and the MkIII you can do better than this:
    WW
     
  15. Nathaniel, regarding your concern about attracting much attention with your white lens, you can always conceal it with a
    cover like the ones from LensCoat.
    On another topic, you don't need to close your aperture all the way to get a large depth of field, specially if using your 16-
    35mm lens, and actually you may get better results if you don't go beyond f/11 in a full frame camera (f/16 would be the
    limit before diffraction begins to be intrusive, so a stop before is a safe point for me). For example, the hyperfocal distance
    for a full frame camera with a 24mm lens @f/4 is under 5m (16ft). If you add an APS-C camera to your kit, change that
    f/11 limit to f/8.
     
  16. Thank you again! :) JDM , congratulations for your enthusiasm!

    @ WW I have 70-200 2.8 IS II, so 2x III is possible combo. The quality of your example is very good even with the older versions.
    Our aim with my friend is to make 7-8 WOW pics, instead of 70-80 excellent. We work professionally as photo team, but I may consider to take 60d . Canon 60d + 2x Teleconverter + 70-200 2.8 = 224 - 640mm !? I'm not sure wheather in that case Image quality will be visibly dropped when shooting with tripod at f/11 with 60D in comparison with 5d II photos !?

    @ Ruben, good suggestion for lens concealing with lens cover & difraction reminder :)

    Feel free to offer your suggestions how to increase my focal length reach :) Image quality is important for me. I found used 400 5.6 L on a good price, but it's better choice for birds / sports.
     
  17. I'm with Monika:
    24-70 f/2.8L and 70-200 f/4L are what I took when I was there and I did not feel I needed anything else.
    I had no security concerns or worries. I guess it depends on how rural your hiking is likely to be. We were mostly surrounded by people with camera equipment and never felt in any danger. However, as in any country, if you are around less fortunate people and on your own, be careful.
     
  18. Here's what I'd take:
    The 70-200mm f/4L IS, the 40mm f/2.8 STM and the EF 1.4X TC-II. I suspect that will be long enough, based on the discussion above. You could take an EF 2.0X TC-III if you can deal with it in MF mode on that body.
    Remember, you can stitch together multiple shots for panoramas. You dismiss weight as a concern, but I think that the extra weight of the 70-200/2.8 is unlikely to justify itself. The f/4 has superb IQ and the 5D2 has excellent low-light/high-ISO performance, so that combo is ideal.
     
  19. I did a trip 2 months ago to Israel. My goal was to focus on landscapes, with the occasional portrait of my wife. I have a 7D, and I only brought the Canon 10-22mm and the 24-105 L. I found those to be more than enough for me, and most of the time I was shooting the 10-22. I've attached a couple of pics I took at the Mitzpe Ramon canyon which is the largest non impact crater in the world (about 43KM across).
    00bDE7-512591584.jpg
     
  20. Portrait style landscape
    00bDEA-512591684.jpg
     
  21. If you are going to buy a tele zoom for travel and can afford it, go for the 70-200 F4 IS its sharp, lightweight and has quite pleasing bokeh. With the 1.4 extender it an F5.6 lens which I find good excellent for outdoor purposes. Ive been very impressed with the mk 3 extender which has no significant affect on image quality and focuses fast with the 70-200 F4. A 2x extender would be a big mistake as it makes the lens far too slow.
     
  22. Let me suggest the 200 2.8 prime lens. Since you are worried about the weight issue (it is much lighter than the zooms), the quality is the same as the 70-200 2.8 IS II... and it is a black lens so that it will not be noticed as much.
    If you get that, + the 2x TC from canon I think you would be happy. I do most of my hikes with a 24-105 and the 200 2.8 II. This makes for a light pack, and a lot of range.
     

Share This Page