what lens to use taking pictures of the Grand Canyon?

[jon_austin]

My wife and I took a virtually spontaneous road trip to the Grand Canyon about a month after I bought my 10D. The only lens I owned at the time was a 24-85, so we literally bought a 17-40 and a 70-200/4 at two different camera stores (the 17-40 was relatively new, and scare in local shops then) on our way out of town.

 

These were the only two lenses I used during the trip (the 24-85 stayed in the bag), and we got some remarkable shots.

 

Of course, the 17-40 is much more of a normal range zoom on the 1.6x dSLRs than on a film body. And even with the extra "reach" of the 70-200 with the 1.6x crop, there were still times when I wished I'd had a longer lens. I bought a 1.4x TC not long afterward.

[mark u]

Do you really only have a 70-300? I'd guess you also have one of the kit zooms, such as a 28-90 as well. You have a lot of advice mostly recommending $300-1,000+ lenses. In case your budget doesn't stretch that far (even lens rentals can work out quite expensive if you have to keep the lens for the whole vacation), here are some choices that are rather more affordable.

 

For around $120, the Sigma 24-70 f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical HF (note the full name - there is another similar lens that's not as good) will allow you a somewhat wider angle of view. This lens has a reputation for being much sharper than other budget choices (including being somewhat better than the Canon kit lenses that are sold with Rebel film models), and provides a good complementary range of focal lengths to your 70-300. A lens hood (use it!) is included, leaving you to buy filters. The front of the lens doesn't rotate when zooming or focussing, which makes using a circular polariser much easier. At around 9 oz it's also not a great weight if you're hiking all day with the camera.

 

If you feel you might like to try even wider angles, the choices become a little more difficult. The Tokina 19-35 f/3.5-4.5 (sometimes known as the "plastic fantastic" - $180 after rebate) is probably the best bet for less than $200. The only thing is, you'd probably need to add a Canon 50mm f/1.8 ($70) to give you some coverage in the gap between 35 and 70mm.

 

Another approach to capturing really wide angles of view is to make a panorama. For best results you'd need to have a reasonable tripod that can comfortably support the camera, lens and a Panosaurus. See http://gregwired.com/pano/Pano.htm for more details, and follow the link to Max Lyons' site - of gigapixel fame - for some inspiration and hints and tips. If you have your images scanned when you have them processed you can bypass the scanning step when you come to stitch the images on your computer. Stitching software is available as a free download (e.g. Panorama Tools). The Canon 50mm f/1.8 would be a good lens to use for this, but the Sigma I suggested would also be fine so long as you use it mid range where distortion is probably least (even the slightest distortion which you will get with the Canon needs a lot of computing to correct for stitching a panorama).

[kathy_owen1]

I can't thank you ALL enough! I am printing this off and will carefully read and research all of your comments. I really came across something great when I found this website. Thank you!

[jim_larson1]

Yeah, the most often recommended lens is the $650 17-40/4L.

 

Or primes.

 

I doubt you will want either option.

 

If you like your 70-300, then bring it. You will also need a wider angle zoom. A Canon 24-85 at $330 will fit the bill nicely. So will the 28-105/3.5-4.5 ($225 -> not the cheaper 4.5-5.6).

[chris_schultz2]

How appropriate that you are taking your Canon to the Ca�on!

[chris_schultz2]

Well, it looked right before it was posted, an "n" with a tilde "~". Sorry.

[chris_kedrowski]

Tamron 28-75mm, check Photo.net's review