Good plan for Alaska Cruise?

TL;DR

Bringing 5D3, 17-40, 35L. Renting 14 2.8 and 100-400 II. Tripod and monopod. Leaving 24-105, 85L, 135L and 70-200 f/4 IS at home. Also bringing EOS M3 with 22mm, 18-55 and EF adapter.

Long version.

So we are going on an Alaskan Cruise for our 10 year anniversary this summer. We are spending 2 full days in Vancouver before we board the ship (Celebrity.) We have a "unique" room that is at the bump out on the ship, so we have a slightly larger balcony where I'm expecting to be able to set up with a tripod. I am also thinking about getting a monopod for the trip. For my kit, I'm bringing my 5D3 and my newly acquired EOS M3. For lenses, I will bring both my 22mm and 18-55 for the M3. I own the 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 f4 IS, 35L, 85L and 135L. Not necessarily perfect for a trip like this. So I am planning to rent a 100-400 II. I'm also considering renting the 14mm f/2.8 or 17mm TS-E. I'm a little concerned about the latter as I've never used a TS-E before. Aside from those I rent and the EF-M's, I'm pretty sure I'll bring the 17-40 and the 35L. Would I regret NOT bringing some of the others? Yes it's our anniversary so it's not going to be all about photography, but my wife also knows that I love photography and it is a big part of this trip. Our honeymoon was a Mediterranean cruise and is what got me into photography as I wished for more than my point and shoot at the time.

Does this plan sound good? I see myself using the 5D3 with either the 17-40 or the 14mm and the M3 with the 100-400. Walking around the ship I'll use the 5D3 with the 35L or the M3 with it's lenses. Is this a good plan?

A couple thoughts.
1) If you've never used a TS before, do you really want to be fiddling with it on a trip like this?
2) Using a tripod on a moving ship may not work that great, unless you're inside, taking pictures of the inside. Taking pictures of the land from your balcony with a tripod... I don't know. Shooting hand-held you'd have your body and all it's joints and muscles making one big dampener for the ship's movement. A camera on a tripod will move with every little ripple.

Will you be carrying both cameras on excursions?... You with one, wife with the other? Just wondering about the 5DIII and the gap between the 17-40 and the 100-400. Possibly consider renting a 24-70 or taking your 25-105?

I'd take the 17-40, 24-105, & rent the 100-400. Bring or rent the 1.4X.
If you don't know what you are going to see & photograph, why not bring a large range of focal lengths.

I've taken DSLRs on a few cruises and what I've found in general is that if I'm on the ship, I'm not pulling out a DSLR to take to dinner. I've got a G9x that slips easily into pants pocket or suit jacket that works quite well for that task. If you've got a balcony and plan to sit on it and use a tripod, then a 100-400 ii will be able to take some shots of eagles from the ship if you're lucky. It's a lot of gear to lug around on and off the ship if this isn't a dedicated photography trip.

Thanks for the tips. I figure the 18-55 on the M3 covers most of the gap up to 100, and I'm not worried about gaps. The M3 with the 22mm fits in a pant pocket.

That's why I was saying I'd never used a TS-E before, Moose. I don't know what kind of learning curve it has, but I've gathered it takes some learning. Not sure I need the 14mm, but I think it would be awesome. $144 to rent it for nearly 2 weeks for a trip I will be paying a lot more than that for. I'm never one to skimp on things like this.

I've taken two Alaskan cruises, and our favorite excursion was a whale watching trip on a small 14-15 passenger boat.
I had a 150-600 on my 5DIII which turned out to be too long and cumbersome, especially when your head's on a swivel and you've gotta swing your gear around quickly. I got a few decent feeding shots, but my wife with a 40D and 24-135 got some breaching shots which I totally missed. I kicked myself for not having the 70-200 attached.

randy98mtu wrote in post #17991802
Thanks for the tips. I figure the 18-55 on the M3 covers most of the gap up to 100, and I'm not worried about gaps. The M3 with the 22mm fits in a pant pocket.

That's why I was saying I'd never used a TS-E before, Moose. I don't know what kind of learning curve it has, but I've gathered it takes some learning. Not sure I need the 14mm, but I think it would be awesome. $144 to rent it for nearly 2 weeks for a trip I will be paying a lot more than that for. I'm never one to skimp on things like this.

For another $144 or so you could just buy the 14. Well the Samyang at least.

I would add the 24-105L to the camera bag. If the OP is at all interested in ship interiors, that lens would give good results. And its IS would help with the lower light levels inside the ship. I would still keep the rented 14/2.8 ultrawide, but suggest buying the Rokinon/Samyang 14/2.8 instead. Consider getting a full-frame Rokinon/Samyang 12mm/2.8 fisheye instead. You can always remove or reduce the fisheye effect in post-processing if you prefer.

I have gotten great ship-interior results with the Rokinon 8mm fisheye on my 70D. Having made that claim, I feel obligated to provide a sample - the same shot before and after "defishing". The second image is defished; the first is the original. I took the picture in the main dining room of Royal Caribbean's Liberty of the Seas during a cruise last Fall.

LV Moose wrote in post #17991834
I've taken two Alaskan cruises, and our favorite excursion was a whale watching trip on a small 14-15 passenger boat.
I had a 150-600 on my 5DIII which turned out to be too long and cumbersome, especially when your head's on a swivel and you've gotta swing your gear around quickly. I got a few decent feeding shots, but my wife with a 40D and 24-135 got some breaching shots which I totally missed. I kicked myself for not having the 70-200 attached.

We've taken two Alaskan cruises, as well, and took a similar whale watching excursion on a small boat in Juneau. I highly recommend that excursion as well. Small boats are much better for whale watching, and that boat was designed with photographers in mind -- the windows folded up out of the way to offer unobstructed views. I spent most of my time on the open bow of the boat, though, as there was only one other passenger with a DSLR on our boat. So he and I hung out on the bow, while the others (including my wife) watched from inside the boat.

Our most recent cruise was in the summer of 2014 -- a two week combined cruise & land trip through Princess. I brought along a 5D3, 7D, 16-35 f/4 IS, 24-105L, 100-400L (original version), 40mm f/2.8 pancake, tripod and monopod. The 16-35L was an upgrade from a 17-40L just before the trip, as the lens had just hit the market a couple of months before our trip.

If you are trying to decide between the 17-40L and the 24-105L, I would take the 24-105L over the UWA option. I only used the 16-35 a few times -- for interior shots on the ship, when walking around town in Ketchikan, and while touring an historic copper mill in Wrangell - St. Elias National Park. Most of the landscapes are too vast with little opportunities for strong foreground elements for the perspective of a UWA. I actually used my 7D + 100-400L for a lot of landscapes, as well as the long end of the 5D3 + 24-105L combo.

I did not own a EOS M at that time, so I used the 5D3 + 40mm pancake as my low profile walk around option on the ship. We did take a Caribbean cruise this past winter, though, and I found the EOS M + 22mm pancake to be a great option for your casual time on the ship -- during dinner, plus afterwards if you are taking in some of the nightlife. It's video capabilities came in handy then, as well.

I only used the monopod during our two whale watching trips, but it was very valuable for that activity. The only time I used the tripod on the cruise portion of the trip was when sailing through Glacier Bay N.P. It saw most of its use around Denali, where we spent three nights.

If you do not own one, I would consider getting a Speedlite 270EX to use with both your EOS M and 5D3. It's much smaller that my Speedlite 430EX II, so it takes up little space in the bag. It does have a head that allows you to bounce the flash upward, is small enough to put in your pocket, and it takes two AA batteries. It's a great travel flash, IMO.

rethink your 17-40...I would not take....I would take the 24-105 in a heartbeat


we took the 24-105, a flash, 100-400 and at the time I has a Sigma 120-300 F/2.8........we got great shots

whale watching trip was awesome. I will go dig up a few shots. Your going to need each from the ship and excursions

hand holding is a huge plus

the guy on the top deck had a 500F/4 set up with a TC and was framing wildlife shots in coves where the boat ship

got these whale shots on an excursion....100-400 and 120-300

Reach reach reach

especially for eagles and they are everywhere up there

"Bubble net fishing "
Whales dive to bottom, blow bubbles to scare herring to top of the water then shoot out of water with mouth open to scoop them up. Phenomenal to see

We were told this is rare to see in Alaska. Boats have to stay a distance away because you dont know where they will come up. One time they came up about 20 yrds frrom boat and we were too close with the 100-400

umphotography wrote in post #17992965
"Bubble net fishing "
Whales dive to bottom, blow bubbles to scare herring to top of the water then shoot out of water with mouth open to scoop them up. Phenomenal to see

We were told this is rare to see in Alaska.

We were told the same thing. And others I have talked to were also told the same thing. I think the guides say that in order to get bigger tips Still, whether rare or more commonplace, it was awesome to experience.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/oJq8​G8

We saw the same bubble net feeding behavior and were told it was a rare occurrence, too. As Moose said, I think that's just something the guides tell you to make you feel like you witnessed something very special. It did not take away from the thrill we experienced, though. And the whales did come up very close to our boat at one point.

Maybe it really IS rare, and we were just all there at the same time