Galapagos Gear

[Nistelrooydude]

Nothin doin in the "Talk about Urban Life & Travel" section, so I'll try here.

I've already posted concerning this trip, and from help here and other blogs, I have compiled a gear list I think will work. Tell me what you think.

Bodies and Lenses
40D
24-70mm f/2.8L
70-200mm f/2.8L IS [rented]

Accessories
Extender EF 1.4x II [rented]
Monopod
Gorillapod
CF Cards (4GB, 2GB, 1 GB)
250GB Extra Hard Drive
77mm Polarizing Filter
UV Filters for all
Cleaning Supplies
Extra Batteries

Bags
Dakine Sequence (Big One)
Crumpler 5 Million Dollar Home (Day Bag)
Dry Bag

I'm not willing to rent more stuff, but if their is a crucial flaw in the stuff I am renting, tell me. I'm open to any praise or criticism. All of it is more than appreciated.

Check Page 2 for an Updated Question

[GilesGuthrie]

What are you expecting to be shooting?

[cedm]

What are you expecting to be shooting?

The unique wildlife of the galapagos I guess.

That looks like an awesome place of photo opportunities. Don't forget to show us your best shot when you get back!

[Nistelrooydude]

What are you expecting to be shooting?

Mostly the wildlife on the islands, but I'll also have a chance to shoot an open-air market in Quito, Ecuador. I've been looking all around and found that ost photographers use their extreme telephoto end more than anything else. Behind that is usually their wide end (<20mm), so I hope my 24mm (more like 38mm with crop factor) will suffice.

And I'll make sure to post up my favorites.

[bsaber]

I don't know about you but I would want a wider lens for landscape. But that's just me.

[tiktaalik]

First, I'd suggest a second body. If you are taking the standard tour (ie, not a photographic tour or one geared towards natural history) you will not have time to change lenses. They will move you along the path very fast. I went on a trip geared towards natural history and we spent double the time at each stop than the general tours did and I was still very glad to have two bodies and not have to waste time changing lenses.

Along those lines, maybe keep the monopod but ditch anything else requiring setup.

I'd recommend a zoom instead of the prime, but that is a personal preference sort of thing. However, you are stuck to a path and cannot move off of it while the animals go everywhere. Expect them to be anywhere from right at the end of your camera to out at the horizon. I found the zoom to be invaluable.

Polarizers are good, just remember to take them off when you photograph frigate birds. The male birds have a green or purple sheen on their backs which the polarizing filter will remove.

Oh, and I do hope you have some sort of photo storage device. If you shoot RAW 5Gb isn't nearly enough memory.

[Nistelrooydude]

First, I'd suggest a second body. If you are taking the standard tour (ie, not a photographic tour or one geared towards natural history) you will not have time to change lenses.

Wow, that's a lot of great advice, thank you. I might be able to grab a second body from my high school journalism advisor, but other than that, I'm not sure I can get one. And about a wider lens, anything wider than 17mm at my local camera store is atleast $100 per week to rent, so I can't really afford that on top of the 300mm and 1.4x Extender.

[GilesGuthrie]

Well, the 300 must be an expensive rental. How about renting 100-400 and 10-22?

[FlyingPhotog]

Agree with Giles...

The 100-400 on a 1.6x body will work just as well as the 300+TC.
And you are limiting yourself at 24mm on a crop body as well.

I'd also consider either renting or purchasing a legitimate tripod. Especially if you decide to go ahead and use the 300 f/2.8

[Nistelrooydude]

Agree with Giles...

The 100-400 on a 1.6x body will work just as well as the 300+TC.
And you are limiting yourself at 24mm on a crop body as well.

I'd also consider either renting or purchasing a legitimate tripod. Especially if you decide to go ahead and use the 300 f/2.8

I'm trying to avoid the 100-400mm b/c I know I'll miss the 2.8. I got spoiled on my 24-70mm. And I do own a tripod, but every other blog I've read has said that if they brought their tripods, they just left them on the boat and didn't bother with them after the second day.

[400dabuser]

More or less, but haven't you to include a tripod or something?

[Nistelrooydude]

More or less, but haven't you to include a tripod or something?

Read the previous post, bud.

[FlyingPhotog]

I'm trying to avoid the 100-400mm b/c I know I'll miss the 2.8. I got spoiled on my 24-70mm. And I do own a tripod, but every other blog I've read has said that if they brought their tripods, they just left them on the boat and didn't bother with them after the second day.

And how many of them were lugging around 8+ lbs of body and lens combo all day?

You're certainly free to do as you please but to me this is akin to renting the Ferrari but telling the guy to just mount the Goodyear All Seasons instead of the low profile Pirellis.

I think your keeper rate would be much higher with a good, steady tripod under that lens.

[Anke]

Won't the 300 be really heavy to lug about on that tour? Plus, isn't the Galapagos famous for being able to get really close to the wildlife so making the 300 a tad too limiting?

[Nistelrooydude]

And how many of them were lugging around 8+ lbs of body and lens combo all day?

You're certainly free to do as you please but to me this is akin to renting the Ferrari but telling the guy to just mount the Goodyear All Seasons instead of the low profile Pirellis.

I think your keeper rate would be much higher with a good, steady tripod under that lens.

^That's a good point.

For those wondering, these were my two main sources:

http://norvig.com/galapagos-photography.html
http://www.bythom.com/gallens.htm

[The_Camera_Poser]

I'd be adding a x2 teleconverter to that 300/2.8 IS, rather than a 1.4x- that would give you a 600/5.6 which would be pretty sweet on a 40D. And, I'd consider renting a prosumer point-and-shoot with a waterproof housing as well, as a back-up, for macro and for splashy boat trips.

[Nistelrooydude]

And, I'd consider renting a prosumer point-and-shoot with a waterproof housing as well, as a back-up, for macro and for splashy boat trips.

Yeah, I was just looking into that too.

[Nistelrooydude]

Unfortunately for the price of the waterproof camera that they rent (Pentax Optio W60), I may as well rent the 14mm f/2.8L for less.

[tonylong]

^That's a good point.

For those wondering, these were my two main sources:

http://norvig.com/galapagos-photography.html
http://www.bythom.com/gallens.htm

Well you have a monopod on your list. If that has a good fluid and weight-capable ballhead, it would help with the 300 a lot for when a tripod is not feasible. Plus, I use the monopod with the lens/camera slung over my shoulder when trekking, which greatly relieves the stress of carrying the 300.

As has been said, the 100-400 is very versatile, though, and works real well hand-held. When I'm shooting wildlife I'm almost always shooting at f/5.6 anyway, unless the light is really bad. But, if the photogs who've been there are stressing a fast lens, you can't beat the 300, although it will be f/4 with the 1.4x TC.

[The_Camera_Poser]

I'd be going for the 100-400 myself.

[FlyingPhotog]

@ OP: Just curious but when are you making this trek?

Might help to have some idea of what the weather might be like. You may end up needing the f/2.8 instead of a max aperture of only f/5.6...

[Nistelrooydude]

@ OP: Just curious but when are you making this trek?

Might help to have some idea of what the weather might be like. You may end up needing the f/2.8 instead of a max aperture of only f/5.6...

December-January

[GPR1]

With the fixed length 300 you'll be limited in compositions and I don't know how easy it will be to "zoom with your feet." My 100-400 works great, and the IS allows me to hand hold a lot of stuff. If I need shutter speed I bump the ISO. You get excellent high ISO performance with your 40D.

I've never been to the Galapagos, but I've done lots of international travel and I'd pick the flexibility of the 100-400 over the large max aperture of the 300.

I'd also beg, borrow or steal something wide. The 16-35 or 17-40 would be great. Your 24-70 will be excellent in Quito, but something wider would be good, too, as well as the landscape possibilities.

Most importantly, don't worry too much. Whatever you take, you'll have great photo opportunities.

You don't mention if you have extra batteries. I would take plenty!

[Nistelrooydude]

You don't mention if you have extra batteries. I would take plenty!

I knew I forgot to put something in the OP.

[tiktaalik]

With the fixed length 300 you'll be limited in compositions and I don't know how easy it will be to "zoom with your feet."


It won't be easy at all. You must stay on the marked path and cannot step off of it. The animals of course have no fear of humans and may sit right in the middle of the path. They may also be in a very nice pose several hundred yards off the path but you can't approach them.

I've seen some fantastic photos from the 300 2.8 in the Galapagos, but I do think the 100-400 would be a better choice for flexibility.

[Nistelrooydude]

Man, you guys are making this hard!

[tiktaalik]

If it's any consolation, I was a total wreck worrying over my gear before I went. That will vanish though once you get there and see the beauty and wonder of the islands.

[Nistelrooydude]

If it's any consolation, I was a total wreck worrying over my gear before I went. That will vanish though once you get there and see the beauty and wonder of the islands.

Figured as much, thanks.

[Nistelrooydude]

By the way, you got a lot of great shots in the islands. I was just looking at your gallery.

[Nistelrooydude]

UPDATE

After your suggestions and many weeks of pondering, I decided to change the list. So, instead of the 300mm f/2.8L IS, I have decided to go with the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS. It gives me both 2.8 and zoom, so its a compromise.

I have now realized that I will want a backpack for the hikes, because the shoulder strap on my Crumpler gets annoying for any walk over a mile. But my Dakine is way to huge to bring on the hikes everyday. I was looking into some backpacks, didn't like what Crumpler had, and found the LowePro Micro Trekker 200. Any yays or nays for the bag are appreciated. Don't bother with the poll anymore.

Thanks,
Henry

[GPR1]

The comfort of backpacks can depend heavily on your body type. If possible, try it on in a camera shop. Eventually I sold my backpack because I found it awkward to work from when I was moving. I sling a bag across my shoulder and live with the weight on one side.

[tonylong]

I'm not sure of the one you are referring to bu my Lowepro has a little rig for a monopod/tripod in the back which has come in handy for me.

[hollis_f]

CF Cards (4GB, 2GB, 1 GB)

Nowhere near enough storage, unless you're going for a day trip. When I was planning my Galapagos trip (never quite made it, Rwandan Gorillas trumped them) I was going to take 12GB in cards and an 80GB PSD. And I was worried it might not be enough.

[Nistelrooydude]

Nowhere near enough storage, unless you're going for a day trip. When I was planning my Galapagos trip (never quite made it, Rwandan Gorillas trumped them) I was going to take 12GB in cards and an 80GB PSD. And I was worried it might not be enough.

I also have a 250 GB portable hard drive. Thanks, I forgot to add that.