Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Help with a decision
Page 1 of 6 next> last>>
Jun 24, 2018 14:08:40   #
Vector
 
Hi all,

I am getting married this summer and we will be doing an Alaskan cruise for the honeymoon. I expect there will be many photographic opportunities and want to be prepared but not (overly) weighed down. I shoot with a Canon 7DII and the following long lenses: A fish eye (I forget what brand), Tamron 16- 300, Sigma 120- 400, and the following Canon lenses: 10- 20, 17-55 f2.8, 15-85, 24-70 f2.8, 70- 200 f2.8, and 70- 300. I have some primes (30, 50, 85mm).

I was contemplating getting the Tamron 18-400 (and selling the 16-300) but wasn't able to get a definitive answer as to if the change was really worth it. Thoughts? Any and all feedback (besides taking them all- grin) is appreciated.

Reply
Jun 24, 2018 14:16:11   #
rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin
 
Vector - Not being disrespectful, but it’s clear you already have TOO many lenses. It would be a better idea to learn more about how the lenses you now have work instead of thinking about buying more. When you understand how to use your lenses, deciding which one or two to take on a given trip will be easy. Good luck!

Reply
Jun 24, 2018 14:20:02   #
krl48 Loc: NY, PA now SC
 
Vector wrote:
Hi all,

I am getting married this summer and we will be doing an Alaskan cruise for the honeymoon. I expect there will be many photographic opportunities and want to be prepared but not (overly) weighed down. I shoot with a Canon 7DII and the following long lenses: A fish eye (I forget what brand), Tamron 16- 300, Sigma 120- 400, and the following Canon lenses: 10- 20, 17-55 f2.8, 15-85, 24-70 f2.8, 70- 200 f2.8, and 70- 300. I have some primes (30, 50, 85mm).

I was contemplating getting the Tamron 18-400 (and selling the 16-300) but wasn't able to get a definitive answer as to if the change was really worth it. Thoughts? Any and all feedback (besides taking them all- grin) is appreciated.
Hi all, br br I am getting married this summer an... (show quote)


If you spend your honeymoon using all that gear, I don't think your marriage is going to be a long or happy one.

Reply
 
 
Jun 24, 2018 14:22:25   #
rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA
 
Vector wrote:
Hi all,

I am getting married this summer and we will be doing an Alaskan cruise for the honeymoon. I expect there will be many photographic opportunities and want to be prepared but not (overly) weighed down. I shoot with a Canon 7DII and the following long lenses: A fish eye (I forget what brand), Tamron 16- 300, Sigma 120- 400, and the following Canon lenses: 10- 20, 17-55 f2.8, 15-85, 24-70 f2.8, 70- 200 f2.8, and 70- 300. I have some primes (30, 50, 85mm).

I was contemplating getting the Tamron 18-400 (and selling the 16-300) but wasn't able to get a definitive answer as to if the change was really worth it. Thoughts? Any and all feedback (besides taking them all- grin) is appreciated.
Hi all, br br I am getting married this summer an... (show quote)


First off, you can never have too much glass.

The Tamron 18-400 would be a great all around solution. Wide angle enough for those sweeping landscapes, and 400 mm to get close for details, particularly if you go on a land/sea cruise, and get to Denali. Then the 10-20 for extreme wide angle, but I bet you find the 18-400 stays on your camera all the time. Bring CPL for shooting glaciers, etc and a decent lens hood. Also, Alaska has real weather. I spent 4 hrs on the topmost deck near the bow of a cruise ship going into glacier bay, I had a decent hooded coat and watch cap, but wished I had gloves.

Reply
Jun 24, 2018 14:29:09   #
Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, Colorado
 
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
First off, you can never have too much glass.

The Tamron 18-400 would be a great all around solution. Wide angle enough for those sweeping landscapes, and 400 mm to get close for details, particularly if you go on a land/sea cruise, and get to Denali. Then the 10-20 for extreme wide angle, but I bet you find the 18-400 stays on your camera all the time. Bring CPL for shooting glaciers, etc and a decent lens hood. Also, Alaska has real weather. I spent 4 hrs on the topmost deck near the bow of a cruise ship going into glacier bay, I had a decent hooded coat and watch cap, but wished I had gloves.
First off, you can never have too much glass. br ... (show quote)


Exactly! Great suggestions all. Agreed on glass, you can never have enough.

Reply
Jun 24, 2018 14:45:59   #
AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire
 
rjaywallace wrote:
Vector - Not being disrespectful, but it’s clear you already have TOO many lenses. It would be a better idea to learn more about how the lenses you now have work instead of thinking about buying more. When you understand how to use your lenses, deciding which one or two to take on a given trip will be easy. Good luck!


Too much gear? Shush.... No such thing if you've got the money for it.

But the honeymoon will be more fun with less gear!

Andy

Reply
Jun 24, 2018 14:56:27   #
tripsy76 Loc: Northshore, MA
 
Vector wrote:
Hi all,

I am getting married this summer and we will be doing an Alaskan cruise for the honeymoon. I expect there will be many photographic opportunities and want to be prepared but not (overly) weighed down. I shoot with a Canon 7DII and the following long lenses: A fish eye (I forget what brand), Tamron 16- 300, Sigma 120- 400, and the following Canon lenses: 10- 20, 17-55 f2.8, 15-85, 24-70 f2.8, 70- 200 f2.8, and 70- 300. I have some primes (30, 50, 85mm).

I was contemplating getting the Tamron 18-400 (and selling the 16-300) but wasn't able to get a definitive answer as to if the change was really worth it. Thoughts? Any and all feedback (besides taking them all- grin) is appreciated.
Hi all, br br I am getting married this summer an... (show quote)


If it were me based on what you have, I would take the 10-20,
24-70, 120-400, and a nice low light prime.

Having said that, the 18-400 would cover 2 of those lenses, paired with the 10-20, and I would still have a prime on hand (my personal preferences). It would reduce your kit and your carry-on weight.

You mentioned that you would sell the 16-300 (which you probably wouldn’t need after that since it’s covered by multiple owned lenses).

I’m not one to lecture on too much glass. My personal kit is pretty stocked. My personal philosophy: As long as I use it all, I keep it all (unless upgrading)..

Reply
 
 
Jun 24, 2018 15:14:15   #
JD750 Loc: SoCal
 
Vector wrote:
Hi all,

I am getting married this summer and we will be doing an Alaskan cruise for the honeymoon. I expect there will be many photographic opportunities and want to be prepared but not (overly) weighed down. I shoot with a Canon 7DII and the following long lenses: A fish eye (I forget what brand), Tamron 16- 300, Sigma 120- 400, and the following Canon lenses: 10- 20, 17-55 f2.8, 15-85, 24-70 f2.8, 70- 200 f2.8, and 70- 300. I have some primes (30, 50, 85mm).

I was contemplating getting the Tamron 18-400 (and selling the 16-300) but wasn't able to get a definitive answer as to if the change was really worth it. Thoughts? Any and all feedback (besides taking them all- grin) is appreciated.
Hi all, br br I am getting married this summer an... (show quote)


I'd suggest taking a 50mm prime and the 70-300.

And more importantly, don't miss your honeymoon. It's a unique opportunity to enjoy spending time with your new bride. Focus on her not your camera. In fact don't even take the DSLR. Just use your phones to take pictures of each other having fun. Plan another trip for photography.

Reply
Jun 24, 2018 15:18:23   #
rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
 
Personally, I'd sell the redundant lenses and get a EF 100-400 II and a 1.4 III teleconverter and bring the 24-70, the 100-400 and the teleconverter. That's all you should need.
As for the folks telling you a photo expedition on your honeymoon is a bad idea, you don't need to go on a cruise to spend a lot of private time with your wife.

Reply
Jun 24, 2018 21:23:17   #
Vector
 
Oh, I forgot I also have a Canon 24-105 F4, and Kenko 1.4 teleconverter!

Reply
Jun 24, 2018 21:31:01   #
krashdragon
 
I'm going to tell you something completely different.
You only get one 1st honeymoon.
If you both have a great time, you can take another cruise for photos.
I'd suggest a bridge camera. Or even a point and shoot. You can get decent photos with it, and it's easy enuf to set so your bride can take a couple of you.
If you spend all your time taking piccies, you'll miss the scenery.
And you'll pbly have a somewhat irritated wife because you're not paying attention.. either to her or what she's interested in. Also... while you're busy shooting, you're not sharing what you're interested in. You'll have to decide what is important to you... photos...or.....
Good luck. You may need it.

Reply
 
 
Jun 24, 2018 21:33:43   #
JD750 Loc: SoCal
 
I don’t believe this guy is real. He is just having fun seeing the different responses.

Reply
Jun 24, 2018 21:44:10   #
Vector
 
While I am enjoying the wide range of responses, I am real! And so is this wedding and honeymoon! Trust me, our bank accounts know it's real!!!

Reply
Jun 24, 2018 22:09:39   #
JD750 Loc: SoCal
 
Vector wrote:
While I am enjoying the wide range of responses, I am real! And so is this wedding and honeymoon! Trust me, our bank accounts know it's real!!!


Well Ok then. Congratulations on your nuptials!

I have recently re-discovered the beauty of 50mm. It’s small, light easy to travel with. And great. Mount one on your camera and carry it around, take some shots. See what you think.

You don’t need all those lenses on a trip. You only need a few. The best way to figure out what you need, is to mount them on your camera, and carry them around and shoot with them. The creme will rise to the top. ;)

Reply
Jun 25, 2018 06:16:53   #
crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada
 
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
First off, you can never have too much glass.

The Tamron 18-400 would be a great all around solution. Wide angle enough for those sweeping landscapes, and 400 mm to get close for details, particularly if you go on a land/sea cruise, and get to Denali. Then the 10-20 for extreme wide angle, but I bet you find the 18-400 stays on your camera all the time. Bring CPL for shooting glaciers, etc and a decent lens hood. Also, Alaska has real weather. I spent 4 hrs on the topmost deck near the bow of a cruise ship going into glacier bay, I had a decent hooded coat and watch cap, but wished I had gloves.
First off, you can never have too much glass. br ... (show quote)


Best advice. As long as low light and perfect IQ is not a priority. 2 lenses will do and 1 will likely be the only 1 you use....travel light/ focus on wife. :-)

Reply
Page 1 of 6 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.