Lens for my 7D Mark II - specifically for hikes (mountain ranges / forest)

Hello,

I have been over the new lens thread (https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=86975) as well did not see a top 10 yet for landscape type lenses specifically.

I have been getting into hiking a lot, specifically peaks and ridges. Living in Calgary Alberta i have ranges like this an hour away: (Mount Glasgow Ridge the tallest one that i tried last week but had to turn back due to some animal scat i did not recognize starting to appear more often than i was happy with, being completely alone and 4km into the woods)

(taken will cell phone)

Sometimes you get into the woods and want to get good pictures there as well (HDR via 7D HDR) so something that might be versatile so i don't have to change lenses on a hike?

The 7D2 is solid and it is heavy. If you are strong and young, no problem. Me, I would go for something like the SL2 or 77D which take fantastic pics but are lighter and smaller and have better sensors.

As for the lens, everybody shoots wide for landscapes, right? The 10-18mm is cheap and light and sharp. For me that would be too UW, so I would probably use the 18-135mm USM, heavier but more versatile. It is plenty sharp. If you want still sharper, then EF primes might be the solution. But to get the benefit from those, you would probably need a tripod. And I would not take a tripod on a hike unless it was a photo hike.

The 7Dm2 def has weight, but I am using it as an excuse to train, I already carry about 20-25Lbs in my bag and normally that includes the 7Dm2, by no means am i young (38) but been working to push my self to get into better shape.

Tripod, challenge accepted..LOL, or maybe not, between my poles and other gear strapped on my bag...I mean it could be a good item to use to beat off a bear...

I used the ef-s 15-85 for several years before I went full-frame. My wife still uses it with her 70D. It's a great lens for a crop sensor camera. For the type of photography that you're showing here, be sure to add a good polarizer. It won't always help, but in many cases it will.

You could surely do a lot worse than the EF-S 24 f2.8 STM pancake prime.

Super-light, cheap and excellent quality for the money.

Focal length is really good for more 'composed' landscapes where you have to think a bit more carefully about framing than with a UWA - I know what you mean with the signature UWA 'look' that can start to look a bit tired if lazily over-used (which I tended to do!).

That being said, having sold my EF-S 10-22 and trying for a year to live without a UWA, I came to the conclusion that there are some landscape scenes you simply can't capture without one so I just bought back an EF-S 10-18mm, which I see someone has already recommended.

For around half your budget (i.e. $500) you could get both and still not be overly-worried about hiking weight as they are both so light.

18-55 and 55-250 STM. That is my light travel kit I used with my 7D2. Light and very good IQ for the price. If you drop one off a cliff the hit is not so bad.

I'll second the 18-55 and 55-250 STM. They produce great images and they're lightweight. I use them a lot when I go hiking and biking, although lately I've been reverting back to the Sigma 17-70 instead of the 18-55. I also recently picked up a 70-300L, which I want to try out a bit in lieu of the 55-250.

Mike

Archibald wrote in post #18682465
The 7D2 is solid and it is heavy. If you are strong and young, no problem. Me, I would go for something like the SL2 or 77D which take fantastic pics but are lighter and smaller and have better sensors.

Not disagreeing about the weight, but one of the things I like about the 7D2 is that it's weather sealed. Not because I'm going to be in rain or waterfall spray, but when I'm out hiking or biking, I sweat a lot. In addition to perspiration, there's whatever dirt and dust has gotten all over me, as well as sunscreen and bug spray. This results in a pretty nasty mixture, which gets all over the camera as I hold it (and press it against my face) and change settings. With the 7D2, I feel confident that this stuff won't get inside, and when I get home I can give it a good wipe-down with a damp cloth. Maybe the more consumer-oriented bodies can tolerate this too, but it was something that concerned me when I had a 70D (and even more so when I had a T2i before that).

Mike

10-18 and 70-200

That leaves a lot in the middle but a cheap prime like the 40mm pancake would fill that gap with little impact to wallet or pack weight.

55-250 and 18-55 are okay lenses, but as mentioned, weather sealing can be important ... even if its just condensation from a cold water bottle, or a leaky lid. 70-200 is well sealed 10-18 probably isn't but is small enough that an individual lens bag would not take up much room.

Sigma 18-35 mm 1.8 art build like a tank internal zoom so no dirt or dust getting inside the body. Super sharp, f1. 8 so you can play with the light and low iso, s. No regrets here with that combo.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18682843
10-18 and 70-200

That leaves a lot in the middle but a cheap prime like the 40mm pancake would fill that gap with little impact to wallet or pack weight.

55-250 and 18-55 are okay lenses, but as mentioned, weather sealing can be important ... even if its just condensation from a cold water bottle, or a leaky lid. 70-200 is well sealed 10-18 probably isn't but is small enough that an individual lens bag would not take up much room.

Not going to find those two for $1000.

I really like the 18-135 USM as a general use lens. I have a older 7D

Awesome info and feed back, nice to see options for a wide range of lenses and not just 1 or 2.

Also the note about the 7Dm2 and weather sealing, that was actually one reason i got it over the 70D myself, cause i know i can be rough on cameras and i would be taken it all over the place.

Just for my own sanity listing out the lenses suggested as per a Canadian site here in Calgary - let me know if i am off a model or F stop model. Seems like a bunch are on sale. the 70-200 is the cheapest I have ever seen it, i guess cause it is not the more expensive ISM II model.

Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM Lens - $379.99
https://www.vistek.ca …efs-1018mm-f4556-stm-lens

Sigma ART 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM Lens for Canon - $1,029.99
https://www.vistek.ca …f18-dc-hsm-lens-for-canon

Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Pancake lens - $289.99
https://www.vistek.ca …40mm-f28-stm-pancake-lens

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens - $699.99
https://www.vistek.ca …l-usm-telephoto-zoom-lens

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM - $339.99
https://www.vistek.ca …anon-efs-1855mm-f3556-stm

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Lens - $359.99
https://www.vistek.ca …efs-55250mm-f456-stm-lens

Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Lens - $169.99
https://www.vistek.ca …non-efs-24mm-f28-stm-lens

Let me toss in an older lens that is absolutely great, the Tamron SP AF 17-50 f/2.8 Di II. This is the original version, and it lacks image stabilization, but I have never missed it. This is a very sharp lens, and the most accurately focusing lens that I have ever owned, including numerous Canon models. They are still selling this new for $299, at B&H (the newer model with VC costs $649!), and I’m sure you could find a great used deal. As long as Canon uses the EF-S mount, I am keeping this lens!