Lenses for 2 month trip in Argentina & Chile - Which??

Hi All,

On January I am planning a 2 month trip to Argentina and Chile. It will be a backpacking style trip with my wife. The gear ill take with me ill have to carry everyday and everywhere since ill be on the move a lot and i guess ill sleep in places ill rather not leave me gear there when i am out.

My current list of equipment:
D300
35MM F2.0
50MM F1.4
70-200 F2.8 VR
18-200 VR
SIGMA 70MM F2.8 MACRO
SIGMA 10-20MM

My main concern is weight I am afraid the 70-200 might be just too heavy... but i would like to hear your opinion. If you owned my exact set of lenses and camera- which ones would you take and why?

Also, lets say you could buy another lens to complete your photography needs for such a trip - which one would it be?

BTW: i will most likely use my Lowepro Rover AW (first edition) bag since it is very convnient with its upper compartment reserved for non-photography gear like books and food. If there is a suggestion for a bag as well ill be happy to hear about it as well.

Thanks in advance!

--
Avi Revivo
My Photography Blog - http://www.revivo.co.il

I would bring:

D300
35MM F2.0
50MM F1.4
18-200 VR
SIGMA 10-20MM

A fairly light set. If you are really into macro, bring the macro as well. You will really be feeling that 70-200 after a while if you decide to bring it.
--
http://flickr.com/photos/rcaron/

Greetings...

I wondered the same about the 70-200 VR when I went down to Bolivia about 10 months ago.

All I have to say is that of my lens choices, it' the one I appreciated having the most. Totally worth it. You get used to the weight.

Here are some images I came back with:







--

http://www.pbase.com/hanyfotos/ (and)
http://www.hanyhosnyphotography.com

kungfusion:

1. I agree.

2. Likely, with the lenses he has, I would have either the 18-200 VR or 10-20 on my D300 most of the time; however, the 35/2D and 50 1.4, are both excellent fast aperture lenses, and are quite small, light-weight and easy to carry ---- so, I would take them or at least one of them, as well.

--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)

kungfusion said:

I would bring:

D300
35MM F2.0
50MM F1.4
18-200 VR
SIGMA 10-20MM

A fairly light set. If you are really into macro, bring the macro as
well. You will really be feeling that 70-200 after a while if you
decide to bring it.
--
http://flickr.com/photos/rcaron/

Click to expand...

Maybe this will work better?







--
http://www.pbase.com/hanyfotos/ (and)
http://www.hanyhosnyphotography.com

My wife and I are leaving in about a month for five weeks in Chile, Argentina, and Brazil. (We're at the stage of life where we're doing a cruise to BA and staying in hotels thereafter.) I'll keep the Nikon gear hidden in most of Brazil, but I've decided on the following Nikkor lenses for a D200 and F100 for landscapes, penguins, elephant seals (if it's not too early in the year), and flora.

12-24mm DX (somewhat useful for FX over 16mm)
16-85mm VR DX (D200 only)
28-105mm FX (F100 only)
70-300mm VR FX (both cameras)
60mm non-VR (both cameras).

The Micro 70-180mm FX stays home because of its size, weight, and usual need for a tripod.

I'll also take a rain cover, a monopod, an SB400 and cable, a few filters, and a small laptop.)

All of these lenses are slow, as is the D200, so I'm wondering about buying a used D300 body and leaving the F100 and 28-105mm at home, as the reach of the 70-300mm VR on the FX body is not so impressive. (I won't go on a trip like this with one camera body. I suggest you consider something small and light, e.g., a D60, to carry as a spare.)

--
Adrian

I have spent long times in Argentina. Published some of my pictures. For a DX body, I would bring the 70-300 VR with the Kenko Pro 1.4 teleconverter, the 18-200 and a wide angle lens like the Sigma 14 or Sigma 10-20. These are the lenses I am using most of the time. For many whale, sealion, elephant seal and penquin images you absolutely (!) need the reach of the 70-300 with teleconverter. (On many protected areas you don´t get very close to the animals.) - Finally, the elephant seals are in their colonies of the Valdés Peninsula already.

Do you have an example you could post of a shot with a 1.4x TC and the 70-300mm VR? I have read this combination is not successful.

Thanks.
--
Adrian

Thanks for all the responses...

Would you guys sell the 18-200 to get a used 18-70 + 70-300 VR?

Another option i was thinking about was selling the 18-200 and getting the 70-300 VR and buying the 24-70 F2.8 and therefore take:
Sigma 10-20
Nikon 24-70 F2.8
Nikon 70-300 VR

A heavier set though since the 70-300 alone is heavier than the 18-200 and the 24-70 is around 900gram... what do you guys think?

--
Avi Revivo
My Photography Blog - http://www.revivo.co.il

I used the 18-70mm for a year. I really like the upgrade to the 16-85mm, but it's likely $400 more. The build quality of the 18-70 is really much better than the 18-200mm (which I returned in a couple of days for the 70-300mm VR). I think that the 18-70mm and 70-300mm VR are very well matched in quality and "look" of the photos.

I think it's a good choice.
--
Adrian

Nice shots, hanyiam. I particularly like the second one -- although it looks like the D200's Auto WB took a hike -- and, of course, we won't mention the blown sky since it blends so nicely into the milky clouds. But the expression is priceless and it remains a super capture. It's worth a bit of PP, particularly if you have a RAW version as well.

Nice going, and it looks like it must have been a good trip.

--
gollywop

-----------

D300
18-200 VR
SIGMA 10-20MM

Very small compartment with basicly 2 slots.

This would give you the most opertunitys.

You have better lenses....but photography is as much about having the right tools to capture a scene when it captures you....this is a very light kit....with lots of options. Gives you wide landscape and architecture options with zoom in capabilitys.

The zooms or heavy lens will give you a bit more options for enlargment, (and I am talking 40x60 blowups...not 12x18 which all of your lenses are capable of) but live with the understanding Galen Rowell gave us before he departed this world too early. He showd us photography is more about the light and emotive subject at hand then it is about the last smidge of sharpness from the heavy and expensive gear. I too cary the expensive stuff....but if I had to limit myself....the minimalist kit I just reccomended would be exactly what I would pick.

Roman

--

'Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, who are we to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous.

Actually, who are we not to be?'

--Marianne Williamson

http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

The 18-200 is much over-rated. I had it for over a year with the D200, and for about half a year with the D300. I took me awhile to realize that this lens, in my opinion, is terrible and does not make up for the convenience of covering that wide zoom range. Get rid of it and bring two lenses that come close to covering the same range. I took the lens to Thailand, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Tasmania. The mid-range of the lens seriously blurs out, so much so that I had stock photos rejected due to the shot being too unfocused even when I took it in full daylight at very fast shutter speed. I know a lot of people rave about this lens, but I'm fed up with it. But that's just my humble opinion. I like wide angle shots, and you'll have plenty on your trip (was there three years ago), and this lens will blur out your corners, add a lot of dark areas when zooming up (forgot the technical word for this effect) and have terrible focusing at mid-range. Sell it and bring two lenses at least that cover the range.

Took these snap shots about 100 miles from Santa Domingo in Altos de Chavon, a plateau they made into a non profit habitat and used just the nikon 24-85 G lens its a great lens that does'nt get much attention because its a bargain. I would take the sigma 10-20 and the 50mm f1.4 and travel light dont forget your flash, I recommend you shoot raw, have a great time.
D200
nikon 24-85 G lens
SB 800 flash for outdoor portraits









-
Roger
NYC 4 ever

Hi,
In case you won't buy a new lens take the D300 with the 10-20 and 18-200.
For better IQ, buy a 16-85 instead of 18-200.
To these add:
1. Lots of memory cards
2. Good CP filter (at least for the longer lens)
3. Spare battery
4. Suitable, rain resistant bag
5. Sensor cleaning kit
Optional:
1. gorilla pod (SLR "grade"+ remote for camera)
2. your fast 35 mm lens
3. solar battery charger

Have a wonderful trip!

--
Regards,

Michael Badt

Photos gallery: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mibadt/

Thanks for the response.

mibadt said:

Hi,
In case you won't buy a new lens take the D300 with the 10-20 and
18-200.
For better IQ, buy a 16-85 instead of 18-200.

Click to expand...

You would have skipped the 85-200 range all together?

mibadt said:

To these add:
1. Lots of memory cards

Click to expand...

I was thinking of getting 1 CF sized 32G + 4G... but i am really not if it will be enough... there are the portable hard drives but i am afraid that they are not has robust has CF cards...

mibadt said:

2. Good CP filter (at least for the longer lens)
3. Spare battery
4. Suitable, rain resistant bag
5. Sensor cleaning kit
Optional:
1. gorilla pod (SLR "grade"+ remote for camera)

Click to expand...

Thats a good idea! its very light has well. Thanks.

mibadt said:

2. your fast 35 mm lens
3. solar battery charger

Have a wonderful trip!

--
Regards,

Michael Badt

Photos gallery: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mibadt/

Click to expand...

--
Avi Revivo
My Photography Blog - http://www.revivo.co.il

Comments to some earlier messages:

In Patagonia, I have gotten good results with the 70-300 VR and Kenko Pro 1.4. Well, of course with that combination you have a higher risk of inccurate focus and camera shake. In any case, mostly the resulting images are sharp. Normally I would stop down the 70-300 by one or two stops. And take several images to get at least one in perfect focus.

Changing from the D200 to D300 helped, because now I can use ASA 640 without problems. And that's what is needed for fast-moving sea lions and penguins - or jumping whales, i.e. you need shutter times close to 1/1000.

If I could bring just two lenses, I think they would be the 16-85 and the 70-300 with the Kenko. Two camera bodies would be better than one, because the Patagonian winds result in a lot of dust in the air - be careful when you change the lens. (When you shoot, the strong winds sometimes result in a lot of vibration of your camera as well. I had that problem while photographing sea elephants in the Valdés Peninsula.)

I repeat my advice on the need for a lot of reach. Sometimes the whales are far away and, as said, in many protected areas you don't get very close to the animals - because of all this you need a teleconverter with your 70-300. Or a longer lens. But the longer lenses are heavy.

Hi Avi,

I too have been fortunate to travel in Latin America, but tended to use public transport rather than back-packing, although I packed my gear as for that mode of transport.

For lenses I have found that the Sigma 10-20EX was invaluable if not indispensible (Chilean Mountains, Argentinean Glaciers, Iguazu and Machu Picchu). Some trips I use a 18-200VR where bulk/weight were isues, others a 18-70+70-300VR (Patagonian wildlife). Convenience, weight and bulk favour the former, image quality favour the latter. On balance, I would rather opt for the 18-70+70-300VR. Not too heavy, reasonably good IQ and not all eggs in one basket. I alsways take a 35/f2 for low light.

My only other two indispensible accessories are a portable hard drive and freezer bags. I use a Jobo Giga One; light, reliable and sufficient memory (80Gb). Freezer bags protect against moisture and dust when not in use. At Iguazu I even took the camera into the spray to shoot withouit mishap! Examples are in the link below.

Hope that helps.
--
J.

http://jules7.smugmug.com/

"My current list of equipment:
D300
35MM F2.0
50MM F1.4
70-200 F2.8 VR
18-200 VR
SIGMA 70MM F2.8 MACRO
SIGMA 10-20MM"

I would take the 10-20
35 2.0
and get a 70 - 300 VR

leave the rest. Possibly the macro if you know you will take a lot of closeups which i doubt, Latinamerica is all about people, towns and vast landscapes. if you will be travelling to obscure places a lot of gear will be diffcult to hide...

also if going places.. use a nondescript backpack or daybag - not a photbag

you don´t need the 50 1.4 föor lowlight - just up the iso on the D300

if starting from scratch and going uberlight I would get a 14 - 24 and 100 macro vr leave evrything else at home, bring sensor swabs etc, few lenses means less lenschanges but still, it´s a dusty place and you won´t be able to buy the sensor clening there

a heavier combo
tamron 17 - 50 or nikon 17 -55 and nikon 70 - 200vr
if you need to go woder do panos

--
My blog http://stock-photo.blogspot.com

I think of all that I've read this is perhaps the most sensible. When I went to China I used my Tokina 12-24 a lot, walked around with my general zoom a lot but also used my old 75-150mm quite a bit as well.

When walking the Chinese markets in dim light I was glad to have my 50mm f/1.8 and the D200's auto ISO capability.

Lighter is better. One of my buddies took his 70-200mm and only used it a couple of times since we were on the move a lot and the heavy lenses just didn't work well for that.

RomanJohnston said:

D300
18-200 VR
SIGMA 10-20MM

Very small compartment with basicly 2 slots.

This would give you the most opertunitys.

You have better lenses....but photography is as much about having the
right tools to capture a scene when it captures you....this is a very
light kit....with lots of options. Gives you wide landscape and
architecture options with zoom in capabilitys.

The zooms or heavy lens will give you a bit more options for
enlargment, (and I am talking 40x60 blowups...not 12x18 which all of
your lenses are capable of) but live with the understanding Galen
Rowell gave us before he departed this world too early. He showd us
photography is more about the light and emotive subject at hand then
it is about the last smidge of sharpness from the heavy and expensive
gear. I too cary the expensive stuff....but if I had to limit
myself....the minimalist kit I just reccomended would be exactly what
I would pick.

Roman

--
'Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is
that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our
darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, who are we to be
brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous.

Actually, who are we not to be?'

--Marianne Williamson

http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

Click to expand...

--
-----------------------
Aroundomaha
http://www.aroundomaha.com
http://aroundomaha.smugmug.com