Galapagos angst

[margiewi]

Only four weeks away f rom a Galapagos trip and in a quandry about shooting style and what to bring along! Appreciate advice!
* Taking a Canon 20D and Canon G5. Had pretty much settled on taking: 17-40L, 70-200 f/4L with 1.4 extender. Considering taking: 10-22mm and 24-70mm. I'm thinking that this is too much weight to carry and the G5 can fill in between the 40 and 70mm range. Comments?

*Was planning to hand hold camera for most shots. But the 70-200 with the 1.4 extender & battery grip is a bit heavy, so I thought a monopod would enable me to carry the camera on my shoulder and give some stability when shooting. Am I on the right track?

*Carrying the 20D with lenses from the boat to land. What would you use to keep it dry? What would you use to carry extra lens(es) while walking on land?

Thanks!
Margie

[RogCincy]

I would take everything with you.

Then based on what you are going to be doing that day pack a backpack with what you think you will need.

I'm planning on taking all my equipment with me to Europe and then based on what I am doing that day will pack lenses accordingly.

[Bruce Watson]

Insure it and then take everything with, this sounds like the photo trip of a lifetime and don't want to miss any opportunities due to lack of equipment.

[Jon]

I'd agree with RogCincy. You don't have a tremendous amount of gear there. I assume you're worried about the airline carry-on limits primarily when you speak of "too much weight", but your load sounds possible. I might leave the BG-E2 behind if you're really concerned about weight, and you might only need the 24-70 on shipboard and/or in the evenings, where the speed advantage (aperture and ISO) over the G5 will come into play.

I'm not sure about carrying the camera on a monopod; I'd be a little concerned about 1) its coming off, if you have a quick release and 2) swinging it into something or someone. Plus, it'll start wearing a groove in your shoulder after a while. But for shooting, it's a good idea. A small one should fit into your checked baggage reasonably well.

For a bag, unless you're planning to do much photography from a small boat, most any water-repellant bag will probably be OK (modulo the odd storm, where a plastic garbage bag over the lot will be a great help). It's not like you'd be white-water rafting where you would expect a good soaking as part of the package. If you do expect to photograph from the boat, either a waterproof housing like an Ewamarine or the plastic bag solution posted around here somewhere would be advisable.

[ScottE]

If you are happy with the qualilty of photos from the G5, I would consider bringing it and the 20D with a 100-400 IS lens. That would give you wide angle to long telephoto coverage and should not be too much to carry around.

The only thing you would not have would be super-wide angle and you could solve that by adding a 10-22 for the 20D.

If you are not happy with the G5 quality, a combination of the 10-22, 100-400 IS and a 24-70 with the 20D would give just about everything you need.

I have a 70-200/2.8 L and find that it is not really long enough for birds, one of your prime subjects on the Galapagos. I would rather use a 100-400 than add teleconverters to the 70-200, mainly for convenience, although my personal choice is a Sigma 50-500 because I almost always use a tripod and found the image quality slightly better.

I would bring a light carbon fiber tripod rather than a monopod for the telephoto lens shots.

For convenience I would carry my equipment in a photo backpack. That way your hands are free to hold on to support and the equipment is protected from bumps and abraision. Lowepro makes some that are reasonably water tight. Once on land you will probably want to carry your camera and tripod in your hands and can forget about the rest of your gear riding in the backpack on your back.

Scott

[foxbat]

I'd rent something special like the 500mm IS. A trip like that deserves it.

[chris.bailey]

I just got back from a trip to the Maldives and took 17-40 70-200 2.8 and 1.4x amd 12mm extension tubes. Together with the 1dMkII, flash, batteries, cards and chargers plus an S50 and Epson P2000 made for quite an airport haul. I found that covered things really well and I used the 70-200 a lot. I certainly did not notice the gap from 40-70 as you will find you are either taking landscape shots or wildlife.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Forget the battery grip.. in this case it merely extra weight...

[roanjohn]

Agree with CDS, bring extra batteries........the camera with the grip will just hurt your neck.

I would probably take the 24-70 and the 10-22.........leave the 17-40 at home :-(

I would not even consider the G5. I think when you look back at your G5 photos and found a keeper, you would always be wishing that you took it with the 20D.

So:

20D
70-200
24-70
10-22
and maybe 17-40 as a walk around lens on tight spaces.

Ro1

[chris.bailey]

I think you would miss the wide coverage of the 17-40 and the 24-70 is considerable heavier. 10-22 and 24-70 would mean a lot more lens changes. You can just get a 70-200 and a 17-40 in the big Lowepro Toploader (75?) and that makes a nice lightish carry round.

[foxbat]

I don't understand all the wide recommendations. Leave the wides on the boat. The Galapagos are dull volcanic outcrops populated by the most spectacular, rare and beautiful wildlife in the world. Coming back with CF cards full of barren mountains and blue sea will have completely missed the point. Long telephotos are most definitely the order of the day IMHO.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I agree with Foxbat on this one, why all the concentration on Wide angle when this is a wildlife safari paradise!

Either bring one wide and forget the 24-70mm.. or consider the 24mm your wide,.

... and then pack as long a lens as you can.

I think I'd bring the 24-70mm and the telephoto and be done with it. Yes I'd put the "G" in my pocket too though. If I brought a wider lens,. I'd take the lighter weight 10-22mm,.. and it would most likely never go on the camera.

If it is at all possible,. grab either a longer lens than your 70-200mm.. or at least a 2X T-con.

I'd shoot RAW and pack Two "X-drives" and copy all CF cards to BOTH X-drives.

[ed2day]

I don't know that you need a super long telephoto on the Galapagos. Everything I've seen shows the animals so tame you can walk up to them like a petting zoo. (No natural enemies). But I haven't been there personally. Your lightweight travel kit is potentially similar to mine: 17-40, 70-200 f/4. I add a cheap ($70, but it rocks) and light 50mm 1.8 to fill in the gap and handle low light. I envy you!

[steibeldj]

You must of course post some of your results. Please also take some pictures of where you end up staying. Those of us who have to wait for a trip like that need to live vicariously through your photos. Maybe someday......;)

[ScottE]

I don't know that you need a super long telephoto on the Galapagos. Everything I've seen shows the animals so tame you can walk up to them like a petting zoo. (No natural enemies). But I haven't been there personally. Your lightweight travel kit is potentially similar to mine: 17-40, 70-200 f/4. I add a cheap ($70, but it rocks) and light 50mm 1.8 to fill in the gap and handle low light. I envy you!

If I am not mistaken you are required to stay on the pathways and the animals and birds are not. As a result it will sometimes be useful to have a longer telephoto.

Scott

[malum]

I've been, but it was before I got into photography.
It has some spectacular landscape, you'll need something wide.(if I can find my poor photo I'll put it up)
You can walk up to just about anything you might want a picture of but I guess you will need something long for the likes of diving boobies.
It's not like a Safari though where you won't get anything without lens 400mm or longer.

If you could only take one or the other I'd take the wide, but as you can take what you like I'd take it all

[Maureen Souza]

My 12 year old niece went to the Galapagos last year (with her parents). She has an A75 and took the award winning photo of the trip of some rare, hardly seen tortoise. (It ended up getting published). So take what you want, I heard the photography ops are fabulous with any camera. Have a great trip:)

[Jon]

I recently got a book by Art Wolfe (The Living Wild?) where he has a number of stunning Galapagos (and other locales) wildlife pictures taken with his 16-35 0r 17-40. So don't sell wide short (you should pardon the expression).

[margiewi]

I wanted to thank everyone for your comments and suggestions!

I recently got the book, Galapagos, Islands Born of Fire, by Tui De Roy. It has unbelievable photos and interesting text. As I studied the images & what appealed to me and pondered all of your comments, I've come to the conclusion that:
1. I'm bringing my wet/dry bag by www.drybags.com. I've used it for kayaking & will do good service in protecting the 20D in the panga to land transit. I'll then take out a waist pack from ThinkTank Photo (they've designed bags for Canon products). This will keep my hands free for the camera, but allow quick access to stuff when needed.
2. I want to do as few lens changes as possible because of the dusty conditions. I'll have the 17-40 and the 70-200 with 1.4 extension on. I've practiced taking the 70-200 with extender hand held at the zoo, and have done just fine. I will probably also bring the 10-22mm because I want to go after images that have animals as well as the environment. It will be a fun lens to play with.

Thanks again!