Which lens to take to Alaska Cruise.

I am taking the 10-22 and 24-105. My Dilemma is whether to take the 70-200 f4 or the 70-200 2.8 Is. I am leaning towards the former bec of its light weight. Do you guys think I will miss the extra stop?

Thanx

My folks went on an Alaskan cruise and the pictures they brought back seemed to be fairly dark. I get the impression that is just generally darker there than most places. If I had the option of taking the 2.8, I would take it.

davudvl wrote in post #8355110
I am taking the 10-22 and 24-105. My Dilemma is whether to take the 70-200 f4 or the 70-200 2.8 Is. I am leaning towards the former bec of its light weight. Do you guys think I will miss the extra stop?

Thanx

no i don't....the lens has 4-stop IS. i'm taking the 70-200L f4 IS and 100-400L in about 10 days. where we're going it's only dark about three hours a day .

ed rader

When we went, it was overcast nearly the entire time but at least it didn't rain. In Ketchican it got sunny for a short time. I brought the 10-22, 17-85 IS and 70-300 IS and 50/1.8 to keep things smaller and lighter but provide versatility. I usually carried two of the lenses depending what I thought would be needed. The zooms did fine outdoors. I did end up wishing that I had brought another fast prime for some of the stage shows although the 50 did fine. Just sat close. I didn't go there specifically for photography but wanted to have enough stuff to take a few nice pictures.

One funny event was we were walking along inside the ship and came across a photo setup with bright lights and a ski mountain backdrop. I looked around and the photographer had taken her victim out on the nearby deck for a natural light photo so I said to my wife to stand on the tape mark on the floor in front of the backdrop, then quickly backed up and snapped the shot. OOPS! The photographer saw and ran back in all upset and screaming "YOU CAN'T TAKE PHOTOS HERE!" etc etc.

Anyway, apparently it is bad to use another photographer's setup.

macroimage wrote in post #8355198
One funny event was we were walking along inside the ship and came across a photo setup with bright lights and a ski mountain backdrop. I looked around and the photographer had taken her victim out on the nearby deck for a natural light photo so I said to my wife to stand on the tape mark on the floor in front of the backdrop, then quickly backed up and snapped the shot. OOPS! The photographer saw and ran back in all upset and screaming "YOU CAN'T TAKE PHOTOS HERE!" etc etc.

Anyway, apparently it is bad to use another photographer's setup.

LOL! For shame!

Was there a couple of years back...I was carrying a P&S at the time, but I would say the 24-105 would be your go to walkaround lens when off the ship, with the UWA in your pack for some close quarter fun, or landscapes, etc. You would definitely want the reach of the 200 when viewing the glaciers from a distance off the ship, etc. I think that f4 would be fine...but if you are not carrying it around off the ship...why not bring a 2.8? Just in case...

The 24-105 and the 100-400 should be all you need since it covers the 24-400 focal length. If you plan on shooting wide, take your 10-22 too.

On the cruise is dificult to use any kind of tripod or base, so i would sugest the IS version.

Grider wrote in post #8355891
On the cruise is dificult to use any kind of tripod or base, so i would sugest the IS version.

Very true. A tripod is designed to get stability by keeping the camera stationary, but how can it give stability and stationary if the object it's on is moving? I would go IS all the way.

Anything IS. Maybe a 70-200 for on-board candids, 300+++ for those whales.

You will need as much FL as you can get if you want to shoot wildlife from the ship. If you take a "whale watching" tour from one of the ports of call, a 70-200 will be enough, but even then, you still might miss a longer lens at times. If it is at all an option, take something like the 100-400L. If it's only a question of 70-200/2.8IS vs 70-200/4, take the 2.8.

wytwolf wrote in post #8356332
Very true. A tripod is designed to get stability by keeping the camera stationary, but how can it give stability and stationary if the object it's on is moving? I would go IS all the way.

Ok, reading this made me wonder. How would IS behave if you were taking a picture inside the ship. For instance. You are at dinner and want to take a picture of your group but the ship is rocking around some. Is the IS going to move around, even though in your frame of reference, you are still? In that case I'd think IS would almost be detrimental to your IQ.

The IS isn't to counter the slow waves, it is for your hand shake. You can't brace the camera to the ship or you get blurry images due to engine or propeller vibrations. Hand holding is necessary. You can lean your back against a wall or railing or even the side of your arm, but don't couple your elbows.

The 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM is a big lens but the interior of the ship isn't very bright and you will want the extra stop and the IS for sure. I mostly used the 50/1.8 indoors to get reasonable shutter speeds. If you use a flash, it is a non issue though but you might like to take some of the pictures under natural light. If you can stand carrying it, do take the IS lens.

ed rader wrote in post #8355157
no i don't....the lens has 4-stop IS. i'm taking the 70-200L f4 IS and 100-400L in about 10 days. where we're going it's only dark about three hours a day .

ed rader

My f4 is not IS.
Are you also going to Alaska?Cruise?

davudvl wrote in post #8360259
My f4 is not IS.
Are you also going to Alaska?Cruise?

not exactly. we'll be on a couple of boats but we're flying to alaska.

we're going to anchorage by plane and while there we're doing a cruise of prince william sound.

after a couple days we'll fly to kodiak by plane and then we're taking a beavertail to katmai where we'll board a small boat for four days and cruise the katmai coast. twice a day we'll go ashore to photograph bears and other wildlife.

ed rader