Long lens Help

Going on a trip out of OK. first stop Groom, TX where the big cross is(it is not a park but a good stop). Painted desert, petrified forest, Sedona, Ariz, Lava bed by Flagstaff, South rim of Grand Canyon, Antelope canyon, North rim of Grand Canyon, Zion natl. park, Bryce natl. park, Canyon Lands natl park, Arches Natl park, Mesa Verdes in Colo. maybe some others. Does anyone know if I will need a long lens for wildlife.

I don't know those locations - however if you're shooting for wildlife then a long lens is pretty much mandatory unless you have very very good fieldcraft and know the area well. The question then becomes what budget do you have - are you considering renting or purchasing - what gear you have currently as well as ideas as to any weight/size limitations.

I could not imagine undertaking that journey without our 100-400L IS. If you have longer, all the better. My minimum would be the 70-300 IS or better.

I assume that you are driving which does not limit your carrying capacity so much.

Yes I will be driving & renting

Last year, on our road trip to Yellowstone, we rented a 400mm DO IS for the wife. Turned out to be an excellent choice.

Our 100-400s are wonderful for wildlike. We had them on our just completed 2 weeks in 4 corners area. We did not need them as we did not intentionally go to spots for wildlife. We were shooting mostly landscapes with shot/wide lenses.

So if you drive/hike to more remote areas where you will likely find wildlife, by all means, have a 100-400.

i love my 100-400L also.
most of the time you'll use it at 400mm and its nice there,but once in a while
you'll pull it back to under 200 to get the shot and its nice to have that ability over
a 400 prime.

I just returned from a week in Yellowstone, and the 100-400L worked wonderfully. While there were times I wished for more reach, 400mm was enough most of the time (and the longer Canon primes are out of my price range anyway). Having a camera body with enough resolution to allow for some cropping also helps. I was able to shoot a grizzly bear and her two cubs at 500 yards and get some decent shots with the 100-400L, a tripod and some cropping.

I'm not sure how much wildlife you will encounter in those destinations, though. If there isn't much wildlife, then a 70-200 f/4 IS would be more portable for telephoto landscape shots.

What about the 300 f4.0 with a 1.4 TC is this a good lens it will focus down to 4.92' with out the 1.4 TC

Some of the places that you are visiting are pretty barren and very very dry: Painted desert, petrified forest, South rim of Grand Canyon, Antelope canyon..didn't see much wildlife while we were there. We had a 50mm lens with us on a 1.6 crop camera. I wished I had a wider lens..

Be very careful about static electricity..getting in and out of the car to have a look at the scenery may zap you and it hurts! We had driven from the south rim to the north rim of the Grand Canyon, camped at the north rim for 1 night. Just about any kind of small movement such as moving a blanket in the middle of the night I could see sparks. I got zapped so many times just tossing and turning inside my camp I couldn't sleep well...but the air was so refreshingly cool and crisp...and so many stars..

Yellowstone is different. It's teaming with wildlife so a long lens will be great for that location.

I have a 100-400L that I use for many things. But if I were renting a lens for wildlife, it wouldnt be my choice. Personally I find my 100-400 a little soft on the 400 end. I know others have "tack sharp" ones, Im just saying my experiance is they are a little soft. I also dont feel 400 is enough for most wildlife. Its a good place to start, but I fell you need 500 or more. I have a 400 2.8L that I use with a 1.4 TE or sometimes a 2.0 TE and get excellent results. 2.8 will be your friend with wildlife if you can get close enough without the extenders. If I was renting a lens I would go with the 500 or 600L. You will need a good tripod and a wimberly head. All of that being said, the places your going seem to be more of landscape destinations rather than wildlife.
A real good tripod and head with a 70-200L and a 16-35L would be nice choices I think.

Thanks T12PHOTO

I have the 100-400 and absolutely LOVE it. That said, we took a trip last fall to Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Monument Valley, Lower Antelope, Zion and Bryce and I don't think that lens ever left the backpack.

I shot mostly landscapes and used the 17-85 or the 12-24. You definitely want a wider angle for Antelope. My wife used the kit 18-55 (or maybe the IS version?) and had great shots as well tho.

There was a woman shooting Puffins in a blind with us using a 2x with her 70-200 2.8 IS on a 7D and from what I saw on her screen, the shots looked awesome.

I agree with T12 on the softness, but I'm still not sure if it's the lens or me!