Yosemite backpack trip...which lens?

I'm going from wed to Sunday.. Which lens should I take? 24-105 or 16-35? I have a cpl for the 24-105 but none for 16-35..do I really need cpl? Can't I just pp when I come back? And also..how would I conserve battery? I have two of them. And I don't think they'll last me until Sunday. Thanks in advance!

conserve battery? why not go buy more battery? If i'm taking one lens, i'd go for 16-35. To me, it is always better to go wide and crop.

I would by one mire battery but the boss says no.. Hah

PP is not substitute for a high quality CPL.

Take both lenses.

Staying in hotel/motel? Charge the batteries then.

If not, but another battery.

get a power inverter, charge the batteries while you drive

DANATTHEROCK wrote in post #10652034
PP is not substitute for a high quality CPL.

Take both lenses.

Staying in hotel/motel? Charge the batteries then.

If not, but another battery.

He is going backpacking into the wilderness

Take either lens....they are both great for the area so it is just a personal prefernece. I love my 24-70 lens in Yosemite.

I'd take the 24-105. You can always photostitch a panorama if you want wider, but 24 is still pretty wide on a FF and you might well want the reach of the 105 (or longer). And definitely have that polarizer; that's one filter that absolutely can not be replicated in post-processing (at least, if anyone tries to do so, they'll end up with a photorealistic painting rather than a photograph). Two batteries, if you start out with both fully charged, should be enough for 5 days of judicious shooting if you don't chimp to excess. Avoid Live View or shooting videos; they can burn up your battery life. Same with Servo AF, if you have the option.

If it were me I would take the 24-105.

But if it were me I would find a way to get another battery and take a second lens.

someone suggested that i take the 16-35 and 70-200...but the 70-200 will be heavy! what do you guys think?

i wouldn't take the 70-200 on a hiking trip to yosemite. It's too much of a mid-range lens that is almost pointless if your sole purpose would be to capture wildlife.

With your lineup, i'd go with the 16-35 and your 85 1.2 to keep things relatively compact and portable.

The 85 f/1.2? Really? The 24-105 is about 2/3 the weight of that (23+ oz. vs. 36+ oz), and extra weight is anathema to backpackers.

How many shots do you get out of a battery charge? Generally 2 should be enough unless they're really old or you're taking a crazy number of photos?

But if you need it, maybe look into picking up a solar charger.

As for lenses, I guess it depends hat you're planning on shooting? My last backpacking trip, I almost exclusively used my 10-20mm. So bring the 16-35 for sure. A CPL would be nice to have as well, it'll reduce the reflections off any water shots and bring out the blue skies.

G11 or S90
But that's just me. YMMV.

Well the reason why I recommended the 85 1.2 is to bring out the creative aspects that yosemite has to offer. I would absolutely bring an 85 1.2 with me on a trip to yosemite. But that's me.

You can't replicate a CP in Photoshop, so buy one or take it. If you have only one lens to take, take the 24-105. It's wide enough to take some great wide shots, but long enough to zoom in a bit. FWIW, I generally use my 70-200 more than my 17-40.

Where are you going? I used to backpack until my knees went south. You might be interested in my backpacking website, The Backcountry