What lens(es) do you bring with you to the parks?

[mcraige]

This trip I will be carrying 3 lenses, but ideally, I would carry 4 -- fast, wide (don't currently have this one), long, and walk-around.

Fast - 30mm f1.4, used for dark rides
Wide - 11-16mm f2.8, used for parades when sitting on the curb, where my kit lens isn't wide enough (I need to add this one)
Long - 50-150mm f2.8, for KS, F!, or anywhere you need more reach
Walk-around - 16-50mm 2.8, used 90% of the time

Also, don't forget a good flash!

 

[bob100]

22mm f/2 pancake and 50mm 1.8
if it doesn't fit in my pocket I don't bring it!

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[Spork3127]

I'll be taking all of my gear on our trip in May/June.

Canon 7D Mk II with grip
Canon 8-15 f/4 L fisheye
Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5
Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L (1st edition)
Canon 28mm f/1.8
Canon 50mm f/1.4
Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L II

What I take to each park will likely vary. Obviously the 100-400 for AK, but doubt I'll get much use out of it in other parks. I'm thinking my main two will be the 10-22 and 24-70 with the others getting specific use here and there.

 

[havoc315]

I have 6 more months to decide on my camera bag... for 7 day/night cruise and 5 days/4 nights at Disney.... Already starting the debate of what to bring and what to leave behind.

Just thinking outloud:
Sony A6300 + 10-18 for walk-around ultrawide. Likely also the 24/1.8, just because it it a high quality small lens, can use it for dark rides, can use it for walk around.
Nikon D750 with 45/1.8 -- for walk around and for dark rides.

At that point, my camera bag isn't too bad. But.... I need something for Animal Kingdom... Either the Nikon 70-200 for my D750, or a 70-200 for the A6300. (Need to test how well my Nikon 70-200 works with adapter on the Sony, or may need to get the Sony version).
Now the bag is getting full... But still some options to squeeze in a little more...
The Nikon 18-35 for top quality landscapes, especially sunrises and sunsets on the cruise ship? This would be a direct duplication of the 10-18 on the A6300 (equivalent of 15-27), but the quality of the lens/camera combo would be so much higher on the D750. So do I duplicate, just to have it for when I want the absolute best landscapes... or do I make the A6300 with 10-18 work?
The Rokinon 14mm/2.8 for Nikon -- Especially if I don't bring the 18-35, do I use the 14mm for some ultra ultra wide landscapes? And it adapts nicely onto the Sony where it's still a wide 21mm...
The Tamron 24-70/2.8 for the Nikon -- Do I really need a "normal" zoom? Or would I be ok, just with the 45mm prime? The 24-70 is the lens I use the most often. Not only a great quality lens, but the zoom range is very versatile for everything from wide landscapes to short portraits. It's the lens I use most often, and I'd feel weird leaving it behind. But there is something easy and freeing about just using the 45mm.. and then I wouldn't need to change lenses for dark rides. Just keep the 45mm on at all times. In fact, carrying 2 cameras... the A6300 with 10-18, and D750 with 45/1.8... could potentially cover most of my shooting without ever changing lenses.
Especially if I don't bring the 24-70, something for portraits? The Sony 50/1.8 for the A6300 OR the Nikon 85/1.8. The negative of the Nikon is the lack of VR, but it is a hell of a lens. And it should work well on the Sony with adapter as well...

This is looking like a very very different type of camera bag than I've carried in the past:
Full frame D750
APS-C A6300
APS-C 10-18
APS-C 24/1.8
FF 45/1.8
FF 70-200 (just not sure if Sony version on the A6300, Nikon version on the Nikon, or Nikon version on the Sony, will depend on adapter testing)
FF 85/1.8
Speedlight, likely

Hmmm, this was a helpful exercise..

 

[dmaxphil]

I have 6 more months to decide on my camera bag... for 7 day/night cruise and 5 days/4 nights at Disney.... Already starting the debate of what to bring and what to leave behind.

Just thinking outloud:
Sony A6300 + 10-18 for walk-around ultrawide. Likely also the 24/1.8, just because it it a high quality small lens, can use it for dark rides, can use it for walk around.
Nikon D750 with 45/1.8 -- for walk around and for dark rides.

At that point, my camera bag isn't too bad. But.... I need something for Animal Kingdom... Either the Nikon 70-200 for my D750, or a 70-200 for the A6300. (Need to test how well my Nikon 70-200 works with adapter on the Sony, or may need to get the Sony version).
Now the bag is getting full... But still some options to squeeze in a little more...
The Nikon 18-35 for top quality landscapes, especially sunrises and sunsets on the cruise ship? This would be a direct duplication of the 10-18 on the A6300 (equivalent of 15-27), but the quality of the lens/camera combo would be so much higher on the D750. So do I duplicate, just to have it for when I want the absolute best landscapes... or do I make the A6300 with 10-18 work?
The Rokinon 14mm/2.8 for Nikon -- Especially if I don't bring the 18-35, do I use the 14mm for some ultra ultra wide landscapes? And it adapts nicely onto the Sony where it's still a wide 21mm...
The Tamron 24-70/2.8 for the Nikon -- Do I really need a "normal" zoom? Or would I be ok, just with the 45mm prime? The 24-70 is the lens I use the most often. Not only a great quality lens, but the zoom range is very versatile for everything from wide landscapes to short portraits. It's the lens I use most often, and I'd feel weird leaving it behind. But there is something easy and freeing about just using the 45mm.. and then I wouldn't need to change lenses for dark rides. Just keep the 45mm on at all times. In fact, carrying 2 cameras... the A6300 with 10-18, and D750 with 45/1.8... could potentially cover most of my shooting without ever changing lenses.
Especially if I don't bring the 24-70, something for portraits? The Sony 50/1.8 for the A6300 OR the Nikon 85/1.8. The negative of the Nikon is the lack of VR, but it is a hell of a lens. And it should work well on the Sony with adapter as well...

This is looking like a very very different type of camera bag than I've carried in the past:
Full frame D750
APS-C A6300
APS-C 10-18
APS-C 24/1.8
FF 45/1.8
FF 70-200 (just not sure if Sony version on the A6300, Nikon version on the Nikon, or Nikon version on the Sony, will depend on adapter testing)
FF 85/1.8
Speedlight, likely

Hmmm, this was a helpful exercise..

For Animal Kingdom, get the 200-500 so you can write us a review.

 

[havoc315]

For Animal Kingdom, get the 200-500 so you can write us a review.

lol.... Why don't you rent it for me...

 

[dmaxphil]

lol.... Why don't you rent it for me...

Or how about we go in 50/50 and buy it for me?

 

[havoc315]

Or how about we go in 50/50 and buy it for me?

Lol, honestly I don't have interest in those big bulky telephoto zooms. If I really need reach, I use the 300mm pf with teleconverter. Basically, ultra high quality, light weight, 420mm/5.6 (or 300/4 or 600/7.1). Works well for birding and sports where I'm at the long end of a zoom anyway. Just not ideal for AK where I may also truly want shorter focal lengths.

 

[dmaxphil]

How you getting 7.1? Assume you mean 8? My experience with teleconverters hasn't been all that good. In addition to reduced light, it also impacted focus speed and overall IQ.

 

[havoc315]

How you getting 7.1? Assume you mean 8? My experience with teleconverters hasn't been all that good. In addition to reduced light, it also impacted focus speed and overall IQ.

Yes, meant f8.

With the 1.4 converter.... It's still faster than most zoom lenses. 420/5.6. AF is still great. The lens is so sharp, that you don't notice the slight loss of resolution.

The 2x is more iffy. The d750 still has decent AF at f8 but it's certainly a slow aperture. With the 300pf... The images still retain decent center sharpness but you're no longer getting that amazing tack sharpness. But it is 600mm. Definite compromise, but a huge reach in a small package. I've gotten some pretty good bird shots with the combo, but I'm probably better off just cropping from 420/5.6.

Example of the 300 + 2x for 600mm reach:

untitled-7.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr

 

[dmaxphil]

Hmm. Which 300 do you have?

Edited to add.. AF-S 300 f4 PF ED VR?

 

[havoc315]

Hmm. Which 300 do you have?

Edited to add.. AF-S 300 f4 PF ED VR?

Correct.

 

[dmaxphil]

That's a bunch of dough to tie up into a prime, but I can see the size argument. The 200-500/5.6 is cheaper but much larger.

I once had an older 300 D type lens and with the teleconverter it was SLOW.

 

[havoc315]

That's a bunch of dough to tie up into a prime, but I can see the size argument. The 200-500/5.6 is cheaper but much larger.

I once had an older 300 D type lens and with the teleconverter it was SLOW.

Yes, it's expensive, but the size, IMO, makes it more versatile than the zoom. Look at the size comparison -- I'd never be carrying that 200-500 on a whim. I'd never just throw it into the camera bag with other lenses.
Not only is the 300 much smaller, I'm confident that the IQ is much higher.
And even without teleconverters....

Comparing those 2 lenses... Going from 200 to 300, I'm not losing that much on the wide end, and some extreme cropping can get me close to the 500mm long end. (Though the 200-500 would let me crop even further of course). And with the 1.4 teleconverter, I'll bet the IQ at 420/5.6 is still at least as good as 200-500/5.6.

So from a practical standpoint, I can use the lens to cover the same type of shots as the 200-500, but faster aperture, superior IQ, and a fraction of the size. I took the 300 to Alaska... I wouldn't have wanted to constantly be carrying the 200-500. Now there are circumstances where the 80-400 could be more useful... Able to really zoom out significantly. So that's a bit of a tougher call, but I'll still take the 300 if I'm primarily going for long telephoto. And if I need to capture both, I'll just stick to a 70-200.

 

[elmoandzoey]

This is what I'll be taking to the parks for our upcoming trip:

- Canon 60D
- Canon EOS M
- Canon 10-22mm f3.5
- Sigma 30mm f1.4
- Tamron 17-50mm f2.8
- Sigma OS 70-200mm f2.8

I'm looking to add an extender to the Sigma to get a bit more reach but I am not sure which extender to use for it......

 

[bob100]

This is what I'll be taking to the parks for our upcoming trip:

- Canon 60D
- Canon EOS M
- Canon 10-22mm f3.5
- Sigma 30mm f1.4
- Tamron 17-50mm f2.8
- Sigma OS 70-200mm f2.8

I'm looking to add an extender to the Sigma to get a bit more reach but I am not sure which extender to use for it......

you can try but I don't think the extenders play well with the Sigma zooms

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[David Daniels]

Canon 6D
Canon 50 1.4
Canon 24-105 F4 IS
Canon 70-200 F4 IS
Canon 430exii

GoPro Hero 4 Black
DJI Osmo

 

[zetachi]

Trying to figure my bag for Disney at the end of April. Moved down from my Olympus E-30 to and OM-D E 5 MII and OM D E M10. I still have my 4/3 14-54, 11-22, 50 and 70-300 and converter plus picked up m4/3 25 f1.8 and 40-15 f4.0-5.6 Still contemplating if I should pick up any other m4/3 for the parks or just go with what I have and see any lessons learned from the kit before investing more $$

 

[momtohms]

I took my Canon 5D Mark II, a 24-70 f/2.8 (used the majority of the time), 50 f/1.4 (indoor & dark rides mostly), and the 85 f/1.8 (only used this in the park one day, but it was the only lens I brought that day and fun to get a different perspective with! I also used it at the SD Zoo)