Lens Suggestions for Alaska

[mikepalo]

<p>Hello All,</p>

<p>Ok here is the deal. I might have the oppurtunity to spend a few weeks in alaska this summer. I have the equipment that works well enough for shooting wildlife, but I am rather unsure as to what I have in shooting Landscapes. And I know that Alaska is one of those places known for its beautiful landscapes. The lenses I currently own are</p>

<p>Micro Nikkor 60mm Macro (yes i know its useless for this venture lol)<br>

Nikon 24-85mm<br>

Nikkor 70-300mm</p>

<p>Ive used the 24-85 to shoot some landscape shots before, but my landscape stuff never impresses me post. So i was wondering what lenses would u suggest. Id appreciate ur input. Thanks.</p>

<p>-Mike Palozzola</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Which camera bodies will you be using?</p>

[seancrane]

<p>Hey Michael,<br>

All those focal lengths can be good for landscapes. Traditionally, the wider the better but sometimes you need a longer focal length depending upon the scene. Maybe you're trying to record a distant peak or a dall sheep climbing a ridge. You seem pretty well covered to me, but if you wanted to add a lens, I'd go with something in the 18 mm range that would be useful in photographing beautiful scenics with some interesting foreground element. If you're using a DX format camera you might want to go even wider. Sigma makes a good wide angle zoom from 10mm to 20mm which becomes a 15 to 30mm with DX sensors. The macro will be very useful in Alaska for all sorts of closeups of flowers and other small stuff.</p>

[lancemcvay]

<p>I'd suggest adding something really wide if you're wanting to buy a lens. But keep in mind, depending upon where you are in Alaska, landscapes can be shot at telephoto lengths. This, for example, was shot at 400mm.<br>

<img src="http://sacredartichoke.com/coppermine/albums/12-12-2008-moonset/normal_moonset.jpg" alt="" width="625" height="416" /></p>

[wpahnelas]

<p>with the exception of something wider -- 17-35 range -- you should be able to work with what you have. it's not so much as matter of what's in your hands as what's in your head.<br>

some folks say the 60 is not optimal for shooting distant objects. but i like the color rendition of my copy for landscapes. so i guess it depends a lot on your expectations going in. besides, i know i'd have a ball shooting with a macro lens in the alaskan summer.<br>

for light traveling, a 3-lens combo of 17-35, 28-70 and 70-300 can serve you very well.</p>

[gary payne]

<p>A couple of years ago I was there with a D200, 28-70 3.5-4.5, and a 70-300 4.5 5.6. For my taste these two lens handled the landscapes quite well, but the 70-300 was way to short for wildlife. I would have liked a little wider lens on a few occasions, but as noted above, some of the landscape cover a hugh hunk of territory, and your 70-300 may get more use in landscapes that you expect. In any case, enjoy because it is an absolutely fabulous area for photography - regardless of what your shooting.</p>

[bruce_margolis]

<p>IMO, you can't have a lens too wide or too long for Alaska. The vistas are just huge and the wildlife always a bit too far away.</p>

<p>If it were me, I would be looking at either the Sigma 10-20 or the 12-24 from either Tokina or Nikon if your budget is big enough. That's assuming you are using a DX format. I would include the 60mm just because it is small and you might want something faster. Other than that, it probably won't get much use.</p>

<p>Another thing you can do......... Use your 24-85 for some panorama shots and later stitch them together. I prefer using a tripod when I do that but some do these shots hand held. </p>

<p> </p>

[lancemcvay]

<p>I'll second the Tokina 12-24. It's my most-used lens. There is a gallery of my shots on Tokina's website here: http://thkphoto.com/gallery/g-07.html</p>

[mikepalo]

<p>Thank u all for such fast and plentiful responces. I am shooting DX sorry forgot to mention that. Im shooting the Nikon D200. I will bring the 3 lenses that I have with me beucase they all fit in my current camera bag easily with the body so Im not leaving a lens out. But what i was wondering is as I said is there another lens that I could benefit from. I did see at least some mention of a wider lens. I am getting a tokina 10-17 soon for my underwater setup but that is a fish eye so unless I want to correct every image I take, its not the right lens lol. Ill definitally look into the other wider lenses. I never thought of the fact that Alaska being so big u could take large landscape shots with such long lenses like 400mm and such. I guess tahts what I was worried about. I would love to go even longer and to shoot the wildlife, But i dont know many lenses that i could afford up in the 400-600+ range :( so ill have to stick to the landscapes mostly.</p>

[bruce_margolis]

<p>Michael, just a thought if you are interested in longer lenses........</p>

<p>Many people rent them when they go to Alaska. After all, not many can afford some of the premier Nikon lenses like the 200-400VR, 500VR, or the 600VR. Just a thought if you are interested in wildlife.</p>

 

[mikepalo]

<p>hmm what kinda place would u rent a lens like that from? cause yes wildlife is really waht I love to shoot.</p>

[ryan_long]

<p>Where are you headed in Alaska? It's a big place with many different varieties of wildlife and landscapes to shoot. I live in Wrangell, AK and love wide angle, but unless you're in pretty good shape and are willing to do a little bit of mountaineering, the ultra-wides are kind of wasted due to all the obstruction of close foliage and trees. There are some decent waterscapes that you can snatch while in Southeast, and I think that and mountaintops are where the Tokina/Nikon 12-24 and the Sigma 10-20 will really shine. <br>

My biggest bit of advice is to come in good shape and a general fearlessness. There are good easy shots, but there are great shots if you're willing to take on some of the more difficult terrain.</p>

[cwphoto]

<p>Ryan Long's advice to be in good condition is so important. The landscape questions usually deal with camera/lens selection, but it's the willingness to access special locations made possible by strong legs & lungs. Surely many good photos are made from the roadside, but don't ya want something unique?</p>

[bruce_margolis]

<p>Michael, here are some rental places. I am not endorsing any, just pulling them from my list.........</p>

<p><a href="http://www.lensprotogo.com/">http://www.lensprotogo.com/</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.rentglass.com/">http://www.rentglass.com/</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.thelensdepot.com/">http://www.thelensdepot.com/</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.borrowlenses.com/">http://www.borrowlenses.com/</a></p>

 

[mikepalo]

<p>The condition part i shouldnt have a problem with the elevation could be a bit of an issue seeing as I live in FL, but normally i acclamate to higher elevations pretty fast. I am a decently seasoned Hiker and love to climb. Im the one notorious for ending up on top of a rock formation with people staring up going..."wait...how did he get up there." That and the camera bag I use is a sling style so If it does come to climbing to get a better shot. I dont have to worry about my gear, all is on my back and outta the way of a climb. :) ... I love to explore especially when it comes to photography ill just wander for hours looking for a better oppurtunity.<br>

As to where Im going, ummm honestly I'm not compeletly sure. The trip is acutally a class trip with my university and the complete itinerary is not set in stone yet. acutally the class doesnt even begin for another month. But providing i can put togerhter all the nessisary funds and everything for the trip I will be using it as an educational/photographic excursion. My galapagos trip (which all my shots from galapagos are from) was much the same thing, it was a class trip, but my prioriety was photography and diving, and Im pretty proud of the way all that worked out. So Im gonna try again. But yeah the complete itinerary is not set in stone yet. When i know definitally I will post it for advice.</p>

[bob_flood1]

<p>In addition to looking into renting, you might look at used lenses, too. ebay, KEH, B&H, etc might have something helpful. IMHO, a manual focus 500 is better than an autofocus 300 when you want a shot of that bear.<br>

If you decide to rent, rent twice - try the lens out before your trip for a full day or more to learn what makes it tick. Don't try to figure out the controls while that bear is getting away or the eagle is flying by.<br>

I took a 16-85 amd 80-400 last summer - wide enough for my tastes, but not long enough for the bears, caribou, eagles, sheep, etc. <br>

Be mindful of where and when your trip will be happening. Mosquitos in Alaska are built to bite thru the pelt of a caribou - they will hurt you. Mid June thru July are prime time, and they are everywhere, not just the coast or near lakes. Repellant is definately in order, but do your homework - some repellants are bad for plastic, which means the camera against your skin could be a problem. They go away in August, but that's because fall begins then. The tundra tiurns wonerful colors without much benefit of trees - it's amazing. Be prepared for rain, for your clothing and camera gear.</p><div></div>

[ryan_long]

<p>Michael: If you or your class decide to drop by in Southeast be sure to drop me a line and I'll either take you up to some rarely traveled highlands or at least point you in the right direction for specific photo opportunities. To be completely honest, my region of Alaska is incredibly diverse and something of a photographer's paradise. If you do head this way invest in a pair of XTRA TUFS; I wear these on all hikes save for deep winter camping.</p>