Planning my "Southwest Odyssey" gear question

Next summer the wife and I (no kiddies on this trip) will be taking a trip to the Southwest United States to explore and "celebrate" my 40th birthday. While she'd rather lay on a beach in the Caribbean, she's game for a more adventurous trip because it is something I've been wanting to do.

As far as what is on the itinerary, the current (and ever changing) plan is to fly into Las Vegas and rent a car and venture out to see: Valley of Fire, Bryce, Zion, Grand Canyon, Rt.66, Palm Desert, and any other things we may come across. We're planning on 2 weeks so we don't have to rush things too much. Obviously this is an extraordinary opportunity for some killer photography.

That leads to the age-old question of "What do I bring?" As I am not a devoted landscape guy (I shoot people mostly), I know I'll need a wide lens (I'm going to be ordering the 16-35 f/4 pretty soon), but I'm not really sure about longer focal lengths and if it is worth the hassle of lugging them along. I don't plan on any proper wildlife photography, so is it worth bringing my 70-200 for landscape type photos?

My ideal setup would be:
- tripod (obviously)
- 5DIII
- 16-35 f/4
- Fuji mirrorless (for the wife to use or when I want to go a little lighter)

Anyone have any suggestions either on gear or even cool places that are a little more off the beaten path?

If you are driving...is it too hard to lug around the 70-200? I definitely would bring it to get some more intimate shots. If you only have the 16-35, all your compositions will reflect the same wide angle view.

Places like Bryce and the Grand Canyon offer up some very nice isolated views of the structures which your 16-35 just cannot get.

I forgot that we'd be driving around and can just leave it in the car/hotel if I don't feel like humping it around all day.
Not sure why I'm being such a wimp about it as I carry twice as much gear around for 10 hour days when doing a wedding.

I agree that you should definitely take a 70-200. There are plenty of opportunities to use it for landscape photos as well as to pick out some details to highlight.

You have a great list of places to visit. I'd add Horseshoe Bend, Arches National Park, Canyonlands National Park and Death Valley for other places to consider depending on the direction you head out of Vegas.

Yeah, every time I surf the internet I find more places I'd love to see. I'd need to take a years sabbatical and win the lottery to do it the way I'd like to! LOL!
One of the worst (i.e. best) offenders are Tony and Chelsea Northrup's "Wanderlust" videos. Damn I need more money and spare time!

Yes, the Southwest is full of majestic places to visit.

We just did that trip over Christmas/New Year. I don't know how many times I wished I had the 70-200. Take it. You'll use it.

Steve.

bpalermini wrote in post #18263688
I agree that you should definitely take a 70-200. There are plenty of opportunities to use it for landscape photos as well as to pick out some details to highlight.

You have a great list of places to visit. I'd add Horseshoe Bend, Arches National Park, Canyonlands National Park and Death Valley for other places to consider depending on the direction you head out of Vegas.

Death Valley in the summer??

With all these great places being mentioned, it begs the question I've struggled with while pre-planning this trip, and that is how long to stay at each place. Every person I've asked has given a different answer. I don't plan any hardcore hikes; spirited walking and exploring is more our speed. Any suggestions on how long to spend places like these to get their flavor and not feel too rushed?

dan.k78 wrote in post #18264305
With all these great places being mentioned, it begs the question I've struggled with while pre-planning this trip, and that is how long to stay at each place. Every person I've asked has given a different answer. I don't plan any hardcore hikes; spirited walking and exploring is more our speed. Any suggestions on how long to spend places like these to get their flavor and not feel too rushed?

I'd plan at least 3 days at each place if you want to explore past the cliche shots at each location. This gives you a few chances of sunrise and sunset shots and gives you time to wander around and get a real feel for the place.

Rather than try to get to all locations, I'd limit yourself to a select few and really explore them. Try to layout your travel to a minimum and spend more time on your feet.

When my wife and I do our large road trips we tend to want to hit as many places as we can, our first trip to an area is more of a explore the greater area and get a feel fro where we want to return for longer stays. Some examples below.

July 2016 we drove from Portland, OR to Banff in Canada, in Banff we stayed in a camp ground but would drive as much as 8 hours each day never hitting the same place twice. We know know the areas we want to spend longer lengths of time in and those we dont care to see again. That was a 8 day trip.

August 2015 we drove from Portland to Disneyland and back via Redwoods, S.F., Disneyland, Death Valley, Reno, Crater Lake, Home. We know we want more time in the Redwoods and Death Valley (and surrounding areas) but dont care to go back to S.F. and Crater Lake while beautiful is not worth the week I had previously planned to give to it.

We have taken 2 trips to Glacier National Park, the first we did tons of exploring and driving, the next not as much as we new the areas of the park we preferred and spent more time in those areas.

In a couple years for my daughters 16th bday we will be doing a 2 week+ trip doing the Grand Loop, Last year for work I was in Phoenix and we ended up driving to Vegas and the GC doing a huge loop including Rt. 66, and Sedona, doing that has giving us a little insight for our next trip. However we plan on spending no more then 2 nights at any 1 location. There is so much diversity to see in the beautiful country and we want to see it all.

Upside for me is I have a wife and daughter who love road trips and are great at it, they dont mind being out of the hotel or campsite at 4am to drive an hour for sunrise, picnic lunches and dinners watching the sunset in some remote area. We have no problem living out of the car for 2 weeks while we explore all there is to see.

Archibald wrote in post #18264217
Death Valley in the summer??

Good point, maybe not a great idea.

bpalermini wrote in post #18264424
Good point, maybe not a great idea.

In the summer in the southwest, you need to be careful about heat. The temperature will depend on elevation. So Bryce Canyon will be wonderful, Zion will be hot but tolerable, and Death Valley will be way too hot for most, dangerous, actually.

Yea our car temp said 123 when we were there in August. We went to Stove Pipe and went to the sand dunes, spent about 10 minutes before running for the AC in the car and getting out of that place.

I'd love to go during the spring or fall but unfortunately it would be impossible for the wife to get off for 2 weeks in the spring (busy time for her) and the fall is impossible for me as school gets back into session.

Thankfully like I mentioned in earlier posts, I don't plan on hardcore hiking or anything like that. However I have been to Las Vegas many times in the summer and know how oppressive the heat can be, so we'll be prepared with plenty of water.

For anyone whose been to any of these places recently, are the lines and crowds really as bad as the articles I've read make it seem? According to them this past year saw record crowds at the national parks, lines of cars getting into the parks, and crowds everywhere. To be honest, this is a little disheartening. It's sort of a double edged sword. While it is good that people are taking advantage of our beautiful landscape, it stinks that the sheer volume of people can take away from the "nature" part of it.