Renting a lens for vacation, which one?

I have a T2i and am planning to rent a telephoto lens for my upcoming cruise to Alaska. I was originally planning to rent the 70-200 f2.8L, but now I'm wondering about the 28-300 f/3.5-5.6L. I'll mainly be looking for wildlife photo ops, some scenery, etc. The 70-200 costs less to rent, but would this be a case of 'bigger' actually being better? The only other lens I have is the 15-85. so I have the wide angle covered, I'm mainly looking for reach.

Given you current lens, I would be looking to rent a 100-400L

I'd recommend the 70-200. With that lens, you have an effective fl ranging from 112-320mm on the T2i, so reach is going to be good. You also have f/2.8 throughout the entire focal length range. In contrast, at 300mm with the other lens (effective fl 480mm, which *is* considerably longer than the other lens), you're bringing only 1/4 of the light to the camera sensor as its fastest is f/5.6 at that fl. It's two stops slower (going from f/2.8 to f/4 to f/5.6). Focal length will matter, but light capturing ability will matter too.

There's certainly the argument that the 28-300 means you wouldn't need to change lenses as often. No matter, if you're looking for reach, for those times you need a long focal length lens when the light could be questionable, the 70-200 is your better bet when compared with the 28-300.

Have a great trip!

I just returned from an Alaska cruise. 90% of my shots were with a 16-35mm (on full frame). A 50mm would have been handy, but I'd left mine at home. For wildlife (and whale watching), I used a 70-200 + a 2X converter, nearly always at 400mm. If you're renting a lens, I'd suggest the 100-400.

Take your 15-85. Forget the reach. Even 400mm on a crop is too short for any serious wildlife shooting. Enjoy your vacation.

Forget about the 28-300L, it's an enormous lens and you already have the 15-85 range covered. You might want to check out the 55-250 STM , since that really has superb image quality and a bit more reach than the 70-200.

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17596433
Take your 15-85. Forget the reach. Even 400mm on a crop is too short for any serious wildlife shooting. Enjoy your vacation.

That is ridiculous. I captured some terrific whale, bald eagle and harbor seal shots in Alaska last summer using a 100-400L on a 7D. My current 7D2 + 100-400L II setup is a killer wildlife combo.

i'd rent a 150-600mm

I'd take my Sigma 150-500, but if I didn't I agree with DreDaze - rent the 150-600.

I will say either of the above mentioned are big and do not fit in some bags. A huge plus of the Canon 100-400s (either) is if you have a bag that will hold a 70-200mm f/2.8, then you have a bag that will hold it.

Definitely take the 15-85 too.

The real question is if you're going to bother to use the telephoto while on a cruise. I just returned from a cruise up there, and generally found I would not have enjoyed taking something as large as 100-400L. However, all that being said, if you're going to take a supertelephoto, I think the one to take given your body is the 100-400L mk ii. But just make sure you know what you're getting yourself into, it's anything but a small lens.

vengence wrote in post #17596870
The real question is if you're going to bother to use the telephoto while on a cruise. I just returned from a cruise up there, and generally found I would not have enjoyed taking something as large as 100-400L. However, all that being said, if you're going to take a supertelephoto, I think the one to take given your body is the 100-400L mk ii. But just make sure you know what you're getting yourself into, it's anything but a small lens.

From the cruise ship, you will rarely use a telephoto lens. However, if you decide to take a whale watching excursion you will definitely want one.

If you were considering the 28-300mm, what about the 70-300mm L? It's not the fastest lens, but it will give you good reach and it's relatively small and light compared to some of the other options mentioned.

gregrocco wrote in post #17596074
I have a T2i and am planning to rent a telephoto lens for my upcoming cruise to Alaska. I was originally planning to rent the 70-200 f2.8L, but now I'm wondering about the 28-300 f/3.5-5.6L. I'll mainly be looking for wildlife photo ops, some scenery, etc. The 70-200 costs less to rent, but would this be a case of 'bigger' actually being better? The only other lens I have is the 15-85. so I have the wide angle covered, I'm mainly looking for reach.

I would also suggest the 100-400mm, either version. At 400 on the APS-C sensor, you will have great reach for many wildlife opportunities. This long zoom is nice and compact considering its range.

gregrocco wrote in post #17596074
I have a T2i and am planning to rent a telephoto lens for my upcoming cruise to Alaska. I was originally planning to rent the 70-200 f2.8L, but now I'm wondering about the 28-300 f/3.5-5.6L. I'll mainly be looking for wildlife photo ops, some scenery, etc. The 70-200 costs less to rent, but would this be a case of 'bigger' actually being better? The only other lens I have is the 15-85. so I have the wide angle covered, I'm mainly looking for reach.

Heya,

On APS-C, the 70-300L or a 100-400L would be a good choice. Your 15-85 covers the rest.

Very best,