Skip to toolbar

Lenses to rent for Yellowstone/Unita Mountains/Monument Vall

Forums Forums Get Technical Hardware Lenses to rent for Yellowstone/Unita Mountains/Monument Vall

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1597
    Killerclaw
    Participant

    I’m headed out west for a 10 day vacation, going to hit some of the hotspots in Utah/Wyoming. I have a Nifty 50, a sigma 70-210 f/2.8, and a canon 28mm F/2.8 that I’ll be taking.

    But I want to rent some highend glass to go with my new 40D. Was thinking maybe 28-300L + 1.4 teleconverter and a 16-35mm f/2.8L.
    Suggestions? Can afford 2. Maybe.

    #22659
    millera9
    Participant

    I’d say definitely get something wide. The 16-35 should do nicely but you may still want to go wider than that for some of the vistas you’re going to find. Instead of the 28-300, I’d get the 100-400 if it’s available and then skip the teleconverter. You’ll have the whole range pretty well covered with good glass if you do that. Have a fun trip!

    #22660
    nobigdeal
    Participant

    I’d say definitely get something wide. The 16-35 should do nicely but you may still want to go wider than that for some of the vistas you’re going to find. Instead of the 28-300, I’d get the 100-400 if it’s available and then skip the teleconverter. You’ll have the whole range pretty well covered with good glass if you do that. Have a fun trip!

    What he said…

    Wide! 16-35 is good. Maybe a fisheye 10mm if you like that sort of shot.

    100-400 definitely better than 28-300 for those shy wild aminals.

    #22661
    soosh
    Participant

    I would look at a 10-22 or 12-24 on the wide end, and either the 100-400 or a 400 or 500 prime on the long end. The 28-300 is good for the zoom that it is, but it’s nothing like a dedicated long lens.

    #22662
    corsec67
    Participant

    I would look at a 10-22 or 12-24 on the wide end, and either the 100-400 or a 400 or 500 prime on the long end. The 28-300 is good for the zoom that it is, but it’s nothing like a dedicated long lens.

    Thirded for something wider.

    That is one place I where I would definitely use my Sigma 10-20mm. I don’t know if I would recommend a fisheye, though.

    You might also want a panoramic head if you want to stitch photos together later.

    #22663
    U-Man
    Participant

    With the 40D, I would go with the Canon 10-22. In my opinion, the extra wideness is worth more than the “L” in the name. The 10-22 is a really good lens. I have one and love it. (get the lens hood, too)

    I have less strong opinions about the longer stuff.

    Corsec67 raises a great point. Panoramics! Don’t forget to shoot a bunch of those that you can put together later. I have had completely satisfactory results without a dedicated pano-head while shooting big scenes. Personally, I like the technique of shooting the pano with my camera in portrait position rather that horizontal. It make it less skinny. Don’t forget to overlap enough.

    /question – are pano-heads more important when the subject is closer?

    #22664
    corsec67
    Participant

    Corsec67 raises a great point. Panoramics! Don’t forget to shoot a bunch of those that you can put together later. I have had completely satisfactory results without a dedicated pano-head while shooting big scenes. Personally, I like the technique of shooting the pano with my camera in portrait position rather that horizontal. It make it less skinny. Don’t forget to overlap enough.

    /question – are pano-heads more important when the subject is closer?

    In my experience with and without a pano head, if everything is far away, then the head doesn’t matter as much. If stuff is kind of close, having the camera horizontal will give a better result on a normal tripod head. If the stuff is really close (like you get the tripod legs in the picture), then you can’t avoid glitches without a pano head.

    In my experience, most common tripod heads introduce much more parallax error if the camera is rotated to the vertical position, because it isn’t spinning on an axis in the camera like when you have the camera horizontal. (In neither case does the tilt axis run through the camera, which is where the pano head really helps)

    Having the camera vertical does indeed give a better result, which is probably why most pano heads do that.

    Parking garage without a pano head. That is probably the worst-case scenario for a stitched picture without a pano head. You can see the legs at the bottom, and how the camera wasn’t centered over them. The glitches are also fairly obvious thanks to all of the straight lines. I meant to go back with a pano head, but I didn’t, and now that garage (and pano head) are on the other side of the world.

    Boulder with a pano head, this was easy to take and stitch. If I hadn’t gotten as much of the ground close to me it would have been fairly easy to do without a pano head.

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.