Alternative to Lugging bunch of Lenses Around?

I'm planning yet another trip to Costa Rica (over a dozen now). Each trip I try to improve a little bit more on my photography skills. My primary interest when there is shooting wildlife such as monkey's, birds as well as more "macro" type objects such as poison dart frogs, flowers and other very small critters. I've attached 2 samples from previous trips. Previously I would carry around my Canon camera (currently using the 60D)along with 4 or sometimes 5 lenses. Hiking in the warm and humid rain forest for 5 or 6 hours or more makes that very tiring. I currently own these lenses:

Canon 400mm
Canon 70-300mm "L" (one of my favorites)
Canon 70-200mm
Canon 80mm
Canon 100mm macro (the more expensive version)
Tamron 24-70mm (weighs a bunch and use that as my primary all purpose lens)
Canon 24-105mm (back-up to the Tamron)

I recently watched Tony Northrup's video on Macro and learned about diopter's and extension tubes (I have no experience with either of those). So my question is, am I better off carrying around 2 or 3 lenses and constantly switching as needed or is there any effective combination of the above mentioned lenses that can be used with extension tubes so that with 1 single lens I can capture the types of images I submitted as examples. Bear in mind too, this is for pure hobby. I'm not looking to sell or market high quality professional photo's but just want some be able to take best possible photo's for my own and friends enjoyment. Thank You.

From your list, if I had to choose only one, it would be the 100mm Macro.
And then I'd add one of the big lenses... take your pick. Two should not be that bad.

Would the 400 be of much use in the rain forest? I've never been, but I'd always imagined most things being pretty close (or invisible).

I think I'd go for the 70-300 and the 100 macro.

If worries about missing something when switching lenses I would take two bodies (buy one second-hand, resell when you return).

I'm generally a big fan of zoom lens use when not sure of distances; however, I could see the 400 for small birds, etc. More importantly, I'll comment on extension tubes. I feel these are excellent and often overlooked tools. You'd be amazed how good large glass (even your 400) is with these tubes, as they shorten dof and also focus length quite a bit plus you can mix and match tubes of different lengths to change dof and overall effect. I have a Kenko 3 tube set I've used on trips to Africa.

diopters and extension tubes do work, but the problem is that they are a bit cumbersome and lock you into specific magnification ranges. And then you have to take them back off to do normal photography. They will lighten the load a little bit (100mm isn't that heavy) but add to the hassle factor immensely.

I'd just figure out what 2-3 lens kit can cover you and go that route. 24-105L, 70-300L and 100mm macro would be my choice.

tkbslc wrote in post #17075377
diopters and extension tubes do work, but the problem is that they are a bit cumbersome and lock you into specific magnification ranges.

Hmm, the standard set gives you 3 tubes of different lengths that's 7 different magnification combinations (a, b, c, a+b+c, a+c, a+b, b+c) for each lens in your bag. The 100mm lens .... well that gives you the one magnification range.

buddy4344 wrote in post #17076199
Hmm, the standard set gives you 3 tubes of different lengths that's 7 different magnification combinations (a, b, c, a+b+c, a+c, a+b, b+c) for each lens in your bag. The 100mm lens .... well that gives you the one magnification range.

The 100mm goes from infinity to 1:1, so that's a pretty versatile "the one magnification range" that requires no thinking or swapping.

Taylor,
I've no problem with the 100mm macro. I own one and use it frequently, I just think the extension tubes are also an excellent tube. They are light, inexpensive and a quick way (when I'm on safari) to get close-up/macro without bringing along my 100mm. Probably time to move back to the original posters question.

In looking more closely at the gear, the 70-200 is overlapped by other lens as is the 80mm and 24-70. I think I'd leave those three behind.

I'm not traveling to Costa Rica, but around my own area I shoot with a 400mm f5.6 and carry a 135L in my cargo shorts pocket. Takes 20 seconds to swap them.

Biffbradford wrote in post #17089345
I'm not traveling to Costa Rica, but around my own area I shoot with a 400mm f5.6 and carry a 135L in my cargo shorts pocket. Takes 20 seconds to swap them.

And that really interesting bird can get a long way away from you in those 20 seconds.

Thanks for all the thoughtful comments. I've decided to take 2 camera's and 2 lenses. I'll have my 400mm or 70-300mm L attached to my 60D and I'll have my 100mm Macro with my daughters T3i. That should be too cumbersome.

The old EF 70-300mm non-L zoom is pretty good, and good closeups are possible with that lens and the Canon 500D closeup lens. Examples are here.
https://www.dropbox.co​m/sh/0kcpmn2jc...Jwpug​lxJo1Gv5a

But I don't think the 500D comes in a 67mm diameter.

hollis_f wrote in post #17089362
And that really interesting bird can get a long way away from you in those 20 seconds.

Not any farther away than they can in the time it just takes you to raise whatever camera you already have in your hand! Just do it as smoothly and graceful as you can. The more you do it, the better it works.

Me? 24-70, 100L, 70-200, 400. Two bodies and silica packets!

Bogino wrote in post #17090093
Thanks for all the thoughtful comments. I've decided to take 2 camera's and 2 lenses. I'll have my 400mm or 70-300mm L attached to my 60D and I'll have my 100mm Macro with my daughters T3i. That should be too cumbersome.

Sounds like a good setup for Costa Rica. A monopod or travel tripod will go along way in getting you a few extra stops of stability for lowlight shots under the canopy too. I brought a Gorillapod focus for long exposures of clouds coming off the volcano and the waterfalls at La Paz.