Shooting Waterfalls: I am going to the NC mountains to shoot waterfalls and general landscapes with a D7100. Is a 18-140 lens sufficient or do I also need to carry my Sigma 150-500? My...

jjenk

I am going to the NC mountains to shoot waterfalls and general landscapes with a D7100. Is a 18-140 lens sufficient or do I also need to carry my Sigma 150-500? My concern is the weight of the longer lens while hiking.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I have been to the North Carolina mountains many times and I can assure you that your 18-140 is more than enough IF you do your part.

Judy1900 Loc: Brasstown, NC

You won't need your long lens. It might help you a bit if you can't get close to the falls but if you are hiking you are probably planning on getting up close and personal with the water. This time of year you will have a lot of growth blocking some of the falls but depending upon where you go it can usually be worked around. Be VERY careful around the falls and in the streams - extremely slippery on the rocks and people have been killed falling from the tops of falls. Also be bear aware; the cubs are out now and the mothers are not tolerant. Enjoy! Our state is phenomenal.

jjenk wrote:

I am going to the NC mountains to shoot waterfalls and general landscapes with a D7100. Is a 18-140 lens sufficient or do I also need to carry my Sigma 150-500? My concern is the weight of the longer lens while hiking.

Leitz Loc: Solms

jjenk wrote:

I am going to the NC mountains to shoot waterfalls and general landscapes with a D7100. Is a 18-140 lens sufficient or do I also need to carry my Sigma 150-500? My concern is the weight of the longer lens while hiking.

With the 150-500, you'll also need a machete, and perhaps a chainsaw as well.

MT native Loc: Big Sky Country — Montana

Depending on how close you can get, I would think your 18-140 is more than adequate. I use an 18-105 and have had no problems.

OviedoPhotos

Consider adding a set of neutral density (ND) filters. This way you can set a long exposure to make the water appear still.

ronwande Loc: Hendersonville NC

I live in waterfall country. I shoot my Sigma 18-200 but I don't think I ever shoot all the way to 200 unless I am trying to capture a detail of the falls.

Brevard NC would be a great base from which to make waterfall tours. Triple Falls, High Falls, Looking glass Falls and many others within a short distance.

I have mixed feelings about "milk falls" pictures. I do some with long exposures and some short.

The camera club in Brevard calls themselves the "Land of Waterfalls Camera Club."

dmeyer Loc: Marion, NC

jjenk wrote:

I am going to the NC mountains to shoot waterfalls and general landscapes with a D7100. Is a 18-140 lens sufficient or do I also need to carry my Sigma 150-500? My concern is the weight of the longer lens while hiking.

I have been to many of the WNC waterfalls and it would be beneficial to carry a wide angle from 12mm to 24mm. Dry Falls, Silver Run, Looking Glass, Hooker, Crabtree, Upper Linville--these all do well with super wide. About the only ones I can think of that benefits from the telephoto (up to maybe 200mm) would be Whitewater Falls or Lower Linville. Hope you have a great trip!

CO

I attended a seminar by photographer Kevin Adams who photographs waterfalls in North Carolina. He has a website and has a guide with about 300 North Carolina waterfalls and a instructional DVD about photographing waterfalls. He's currently revising the website.
http://www.kadamsphoto.com/north_carolina_waterfalls/updates.html

jjenk

Thanks for all of your input--very helpful.

Leitz Loc: Solms

ronwande wrote:

I have mixed feelings about "milk falls" pictures.

They make one wonder whether there's a waste treatment plant upstream, or someone's emptying the bath water! :lol:

MarkD Loc: NYC

Consider bringing an ultrawide. Sometimes 18mm isn't wide enough.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Shooting waterfalls is fun but more fun would be to blur your waterfalls using a slow shutter speed. Enter a ND filter, the one for the smaller zoom will cost you way less than the one for the cannon zoom. A tripod would also help, at least a 5 sec. exposure ranging up to 30 seconds would be nice.

phit4life Loc: Indiana

CO wrote:

I attended a seminar by photographer Kevin Adams who photographs waterfalls in North Carolina. He has a website and has a guide with about 300 North Carolina waterfalls and a instructional DVD about photographing waterfalls. He's currently revising the website.
http://www.kadamsphoto.com/north_carolina_waterfalls/updates.html

Did you enjoy that workshop? I've considered it.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

billnikon wrote:

Shooting waterfalls is fun but more fun would be to blur your waterfalls using a slow shutter speed. Enter a ND filter, the one for the smaller zoom will cost you way less than the one for the cannon zoom. A tripod would also help, at least a 5 sec. exposure ranging up to 30 seconds would be nice.

When hiking it is not always practical to bring a tripod. Any decent tripod with a head will weigh at least 3 lbs if not more.

A technique that works lets you shoot at a hand-holdable shutter speed, 1/30 with a wider angle or faster with a longer lens.

If you want the effect of a 1 sec exposure,

1) Take (30) 1/30 sec exposures.

2) Open the series as layers in Photoshop CS5 or later, highlight all the layers and select from the menu Edit-Auto-Align.

3) Then with the layers still highlighted, from the menu select Layer-Smart Objects-Convert to Smart Object. Once this completes, you will have a single smart object layer in the layer palette.

4)Select from the menu Layer-Smart Objects-Stackmode-Mean. Your 30 images will be rendered as a single one with the water looking smooth, as if you exposed it for 1 sec.

Here are a couple of examples using this technique:

(Download)