Lenses for Nepal trekking

Hi.

I am going on a three week trek in Nepal. Will walk to Everest Base Camp, and attempt to reach the summit of Imja Tse (Island Peak) at 6189m.

I will bring an EOS 30D, but I am uncertain about what lenses to take along. I have the 17-85 IS, 70-200 IS, EF-S 60 macro EF 50 f/1.8 II, EF-S 10-22 and a Canon 1,4x extender.

I was planning on binging along the 10-22, 17-85 and 60 macro. But I think the 70-200 at more than 1,5 Kg is too heavy.

If you could suggest any lens to take along, considering weight as a very important factor, what would you suggest, and why?

For other reasons, I am also bringing a compact ultrazoom. Should I leave the tele zoom at home, and rely solely on the compact for such shots, to save the weight?

Thanks for any suggestions.

Erik

Your choice of lenses is pretty good. You will need the 60mm macro only if you are specifically interested in the local small scale flora & fauna. A 50mm F1.8/1.4 might be better for low light conditions, such as inside the temples & monasteries where flash is often not allowed. The compact ultrazoom you will need for the actual mountaineering bit and also be useful as a tele lens. A heavy telezoom is inadisable as in high altitude every ounce of extra weight tends to bog you down.
--
Gautam

Personally, for what I like to photograph on such an expedition:

1) I wouldn't bother with the macro. I would just take along an ext tube for the 50mm. Some of my best macros have been with my 50/1.4 and ext tubes. If you are a macro nut, then sure, bring the 60. But for general macros, it isn't worth the extra lens.

2) I would definitely be bringing a longer lens. At the very least a 70-200. I would probably bring my 300/4 and 1.4x tc. Think of all the potential wildlife and far off landscape opportunities.

3) I have the 17-85, but I have never brought it on a trip like that. I did the first couple times, and never took a single photo with it. I ended up taking 90% of photos with my 10-22.

I trekked to Everest Base Camp and Kala Pattar in Oct 04. Max altitude 5545m. You are going much higher, one of the highest non-technical trek/climbs in the world and WEIGHT is undeniably a critical factor - especially if you are the one doing the carrying!

When I trekked to EBC I had a 10D, Tamron 17-35, 28-75 and Sigma 70-300 APO. Foolishly I had another film body with me for slides. That was too much and I would have found the going easier with less gear. I am so glad I did not have my 100-400L with me. That would have made the trek a lot less enjoyable.

Have you been to high altitude before? I presume "yes" because you are undertaking a pretty serious challenge for which I salute you. I'd love to have a go myself. And at the kind of altitude you are headed for I can see the appeal of a long lens. I say if you must take one take a decent light-weight zoom lens (like the Siggy 70-300 APO DG) or a light weight tele lens (Canon EF 200mm f/2.8?)...with the emphasis on LIGHT-WEIGHT. But an L zoom lens? Forget it unless you have got more stamina than a yak.

Think of what else you can not afford to leave out of your bag..like the litres of water you will need to keep yourslef hydrated to afoid AMS. That water is heavy but you must carry it.

One last question: Are you going there to reach the summit or take pictures? I know it's both, but if primarily the former, you will increase your chances if you leave the heavy stuff at home!

I just wish I could rationalise taking my 100-400L with me to the Karakorum this year trekking to K2 base camp, but my previous experience at high altitude tells me I will feel pain if I do so. Better to take the minimalist (Alpinist?) approach and take only the lenses that I will need most. I will be taking my 5D, Contax Zeiss 28mm f/2.8 for wide angle and Canon EF 80mm f/1.8 for portraits and stitched panos. I don't think I will even bother with the 17-35 lens.

Good luck! I'd love to see some of our pictures when you return safely.

Regards,
--
Dave Collier
http://www.pbase.com/scubamoo

Worked in the area for a couple of months (a few years ago now) and weight is a huge issue, esp above 5000m.

1. 10-22 and 17-85 are no brainers and you'll probably use > 95% of time
2. 70-300 IS or Sigma 70-300 APO also well worth taking

70-200 is too heavy but it would be a shame to loose long end as to get close-ups of peak of everest etc you will need 200-300mm. Would be worth getting 70-300 IS or sigma 70-300 APO to take instead. Not so much wildlife up there apart from yaks but quite a few landscapes that longer lens would be very useful for.

I love my EF-S 60 but unless you plan on taking loads of macros I would take a 70-300 over it and i think taking both is probably too much.

For ascent of Island peak would probably just take one lens, two at very most. You aren't going to be wanting to change lens much while climbing!

Have fun

John

That is the best advice so far. (some of the replies I have to worry about!) I've climbed in the Andes, the Alps, have done the same trek you are planning and am going back this year to have a crack at Ama Dablam in winter.

If you have a look at my climbing galleries you'll see some consistent themes coming out in the mountain pics - namely, lightweight is best! On the mountains I would carry a small compact digital (Fuji but now a Canon A95 which I can use one handed whilst dangling off a rope and still with gloves on) and an Olympus Mju fixed focal lens for Velvia slide film.

Don't even think of lugging anything more up the hill with you. Think too about what you are going to be happy leaving at base camp......I've been lucky, have never had anything stolen but it might happen whilst you are away. Even on Kala Pattar you're going to be knackered! excess weight is something you'll curse yourself about - absolutely do not take a tripod! Learn to work your equipment to the circumstances.

All that said, I'd go with a small compact, zoom lens if you must for the hill days and the 30D (I have a 20D and will be taking it back this November/December) and no more than two lenses. Ultra wide is a must. In addition, I wold go with a longer reach zoom - the local Sherpa people, for all that they are now very accustomed to the intrusiveness of westernised visitors, do not like having their photos taken. A long reach lens can help. For all that a 50m 1.8 weighs throw that in as well! You might be mad enough to want to carry it up the hill!

Good luck.

--
http://www.pbase.com/angusmac

in reply to vancemac - there is pretty much no wildlife above Namche Bazaar apart from the yaks. The long range lens was hardly used at all in my case - I barely touched it and certainly won't be taking it back this year. My plan is for the 20D, Sigma 12-24 and the Canon 24-105. Plus my Oly Mju compact for slides.
--
http://www.pbase.com/angusmac

McGus said:

in reply to vancemac - there is pretty much no wildlife above
Namche Bazaar apart from the yaks.

Click to expand...

I assumed that he wasn't spending all 3 weeks above 5000m.

Thanks for your good advice. I will consider them all carefully.

I was planning on bringing only the compact for the climb. So the highest altitude I will carry the DSLR to is around 5500m.

Canon say they can lend me a 70-300 DO.
That would give me
EF-S 10-22
EF-S 17-85
EF 70-300 DO
EF 50mm f/1,8 II

This would cover me very well. But is it still too much? I have been at altitudes before, but not above 4200m, so this is a different ballpark, I know.

I can probably borrow lenses of my choise from Canon, and maybe also from Sigma. Will that change your recomendations?

Erik

Carefully reconsider: as long as you are not taking all the lenses to the top of Island Peak, and leave some in camp, you will be OK. But even then you will have a heavy load for trekking.

If you are taking all to the top, including the 70-300 at another 720 gms, -a lot at the altituded - in all, batteries etc. added, you are looking at about 5 kgs of gear, rucksack not included (do not even think about a shoulder bag).

For the top, take only your camera, plus 3 batteries, plus the 10-22 and the 50; you will already have 2 kgs+. Add the necessary water (2kgs), extra clothing and emergency food, the rucksack, two poles, crampons and there you are already stuck with 10 kgs! (we are forgetting the shoes here

As said in this thread: you will use wide for > 95%. Do not bother too much with the tele. And the 60mm is great, but not for this trip. To wrap up, have a look at: http://www.fredmiranda.com/A19/

Take 350xt, 10-22, kit lens, 50 1.8, and SONY H1 (or canon s2,s3).

This will cover everything, and be considerably lighter than your other setup.

The H1 covers macro, and mid wide to long tele, and has stunning IQ.
The xt is way lighter, and will give you the same pics.

faaeri said:

Thanks for your good advice. I will consider them all carefully.

I was planning on bringing only the compact for the climb. So the
highest altitude I will carry the DSLR to is around 5500m.

Canon say they can lend me a 70-300 DO.
That would give me
EF-S 10-22
EF-S 17-85
EF 70-300 DO
EF 50mm f/1,8 II

This would cover me very well. But is it still too much? I have
been at altitudes before, but not above 4200m, so this is a
different ballpark, I know.
I can probably borrow lenses of my choise from Canon, and maybe
also from Sigma. Will that change your recomendations?

Erik

Click to expand...

I've not been at those altitudes, but can relate to wanting to par down the weight. The 50 f/1.8 is light, but still is extra weight. Consider the value each lens adds when counting the cost. Another consideration is that the 350D is a bit smaller and lighter than the 30D. If you need a minimalist setup, then it is worth considering.

If I could only take one lens (from your list), it would be the Canon 17-85 IS. If only two lenses it would be the 17-85 & 10-22. The 70-300 is a great addition, but a lot of extra weight. I think that only you know yourself well enough to decide if you can carry it. If you have not experience with steep climbs, then you might consider leaving the 70-300 behind.

-Gene L.

I just can't stop dribbling! Your galleries are fantastic!!!
I love that pic of a roped up climber with the Brocken Spectre behind!
I hope youy don't mind but I made a link here for others to see.



--A
Dave Collier
http://www.pbase.com/scubamoo

I think I might start to agree with this. I will hurt to go with no tele lens, but may be the extra weight will hurt more. And since I bring a compact ultrazoom, I will have tele anyway.

But what if I bring a telezoom as well, try to carry it, and if it gets too heavy, I can leave it on the Yak the next day. That would give me a chance to use it if I can carry it, and if not, I can at least use it in the afternoons. and rely on wide angle and the ultrazoom during daytime.

Erik

Hi,

Just since you are a climber I thought I would have a quick hijack of this thread! I am looking for a tripod or something to use whilst up in the hills (Scottish Highlands, all seasons - and hopefully abroad it I can find some cash!). I want to be able to take some long exposures so need some kind of a support. Any suggestions? Thinking of the tumbling water, remote lochs and sunrise/sunset whilst out camping in the back of the boonies!

Cheers!

Rob

Rob

I'm just a trekker and for short treks I take a Manfrotto 190 PRO, which is far too heavy for mountaineering.

The little beast I take on high altitude treks is a tiny Velbon which has telescopic legs and stands only about 103.5cm high. It's flimsy but just about able to hold a 5D and lens.

Risky I know, but it is light at 500g and that counts! It can carry 1kg and packs down to about 26cm.

The model: VTP-815

Compact 8-section tripod with 15mm top leg diameter, 2nway all metal panhead and carrying case.
Color: Black, Blue, Red
bar code:
Black 4907990 259820
Blue 4907990 259844
Red 4907990 259868
Check this link
http://www.velbon-tripod.com/table_mono_pods.htm

Dave

--
Dave Collier
http://www.pbase.com/scubamoo

Cheers - I am basically looking for something small, light and just about good enough so I shall add that to my list (along with the Manfrotto 714SHB and Velbon Ultra Maxi SF). I too have a 190 and figured it was a bit much for long trips when I have enough other kit to carry anyway ;-)

Rather than taking a L tele zoom or nothing idea, why not look at the cheap EF-S plastic zooms like the 55-200?

It wont take great photos like a L, but as i said, its a cheap lens, its light and small.

--
Mark Williams (Rocky Mounatins, Canada).
Canon 350D + Sigma 18-50 f2.8 + 55-200 USM-II + TCON17

Dave, that is really kind of you, thanks! Quite happy for you to link to that picture - it is of my wife when we had just topped out of a climb here in Scotland - She had just got off the really steep ground and I turned round to check on her - best brocken spectre I've seen in the mountains!

I see there has been some more good advice given here - I might have been a tad harsh earlier! But I still maintain that if the OP is actually "climbing" (which is what Island Peak is - ropes, ice axe(s) and the whole shooting match) he is not likely to be carrying an SLR - something he can use one handed whilst wearing gloves is the best bet. Lower down though, trekking, I'd definitely take the 30D or whatever and the best lenses he has - it is an amazing place. I see from a quick look you've been there too so I'm off for a squint at your galleries!
--
http://www.pbase.com/angusmac

Rob, I've got a Velbon carbon fibre job - its the El Carmagne 640. TBH I wouldn't take it climbing! Certainly here in Scotland but if I am going hillwalking then it regularly comes with me. It is the best compromise I could find between a really good sturdy tripod and a low(ish!) weight!

For what its worth you could look into Leki trekking poles - they do one where you can convert it into a mono pod - probably the best option frankly.
--
http://www.pbase.com/angusmac