KenProspero

I'll be going on a cruise to Antarctica in March.

Current equipment =

Nikon Z5
Nikon Z 24-200 f/4-6.3
Nikon 17-35 f/2.8 (would use with FTZ)
Sigma 100-400 f/5-6.3 (would use with FTZ)
Sigma 1.4x Teleconverter
Samyang 14 f/2.8 (Pentax Build with converter).

My thoughts right now.

Definitely taking the 24-200.
Almost certainly taking the 17-35.
Almost certainly leaving the 14 mm lens

The real question is whether I should take the 100-400mm lens and the extra weight.

If it helps -- on a recent trip to the Galapagos I brough both lenses. Where a lens swap wasn't practical (as will be the case in Antarctica), after a couple of days, I opted for the flexibility of the 24-200 over the extra reach of the 100-400. And based on this experience, I'm considering leaving the longer lens at home.

The advice I'm looking for, from anyone who has taken an Antarctica Cruise -- how essential do you think having the longer (up to 560mm in good light) lens is? Will I kick myself forever if I don't bring it.

(Yes, I know that one option is bringing the lens even if I never use it -- and that is a possibility).

User ID

Exactly what youve expressed.
Go with that.

No one returning ever lets us know just how it all worked out. You could be the first to do so.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

I am heading down there in February with JP Caponigro and Seth Resnick on an Antarctica 21 tour; both have been there 8 times in the past. Weight is a major factor in what we take. After extensive discussion with both leaders, I have opted for two Nikon Z7iis, one 14-120 ƒ/4, one 70-200 ƒ/2.8, and one 17-35mm ƒ4 lens.

Resnick stated that he shoots mainly at ~ƒ5.6 in Antarctica, keeping shutter speed high and avoiding a too high ISO. They suggest that I keep the 24-120 and 70-200 lenses attached while using the 17-35 very rarely. We will be spending a lot of time in Zodiacs so I have rigged up a 30 Liter waterproof backpack with foams cushions to hold the two cameras while in the Zodiacs.

KenProspero

\

Thanks for that input. Main reason taking either the 14mm or the 17-35 is in case I get lucky and have a chance to shoot the Southern Lights. Though I'll really miss the 14mm, I like the optics of the Nikon Lens much better for any daytime shooting.

Backpack -- Currently I use a Lowepro 300, for transport and a 20 liter drybag for zodiac landings.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

Well I'm sure Caponigro's and Resnick's recommendations reflect their respective shooting styles. Caponigro prefers wide-angle lenses and Resnick normally roams around with a couple of long Telephoto Zooms.

DMB70

I just returned from a 17-day cruise from Buenos Aires to Ushuaia last month. We stopped in Shetland islands, Stanley, Falklands, South Georgia, and then Antarctica. When you are on board the ship a long lens is what you need to take pictures of the birds that follow the ship. I would not attempt to change lenses anywhere else. The advice I received and the weather I experienced is you can experience all four seasons in a very short time. The ship's professional photographers only used telephotos when on a landing. I would suggest leaving the 17-35 at home.
Don't forget your waterproof cell phone for short videos. Don't forget a waterproof bag to put your camera in before returning to the ship. On my cruise, we were given a waterproof backpack to use and keep. Also, bring waterproof pants. It can get quite wet when you are on the Zodiac.

Judy795

I went to Antarctica in Dec 2019 with Muench Workshops. 10 pro’s and 90 passengers. Only us on the ship. 2 landings a day and lots of Zodiac rides. Mostly very experienced men.
Almost all had and used a lens that went up to 500 or 600. And handheld these lenses. Very few with tripods. I was so sorry I didn’t have my current 500PF which is so easy to handhold. I took my 200-500 but unfortunately couldn’t use it much. There are lots of great opportunities for isolating a few penguins on a ridge or jump thru water or into water.
I used my AF-S 70-300 a lot. I did not try to change lenses on a landing. Lots of folks took two cameras and lenses on landings. Make sure you have a dry bag and a towel or some thing to pad.
I used my 24-70 for a lot of landscape shots.
Shots I wish I had gotten : late night sunset/sun rise, found a great background and waited for a penguin to walk by, penguins jumping off high snowbank into water, albatross, from the stern of the ship ice pieces floating in the current. Next time.
You should get lots of chicks shots.
Take Hot Pockets hand warmers. Take an electric strip you can plug lots of cords in. If you get sea sick have Bonine and Zofran. I was laid low over the Drake for over a day. Coming back was quiet.
Take sheep wool inner soles for the boots they lend you.
I would love to go again.

Bill_de Loc: US

https://www.swoop-antarctica.com/travel/photography#:~:text=A%20wide%2Dangle%20lens%20such
---

mdoing

I had a Lumix G9 with 100-400mm lens, 200-800 Equivalent in FF and used it most of the time in Antarctica, the longer the better. My recommendation is bring the long lens and I guess the 24-200. If you can, bring two bodies so won't need to change lenses. Changing lenses in a Zodiac, cold and wet, gloves, mist, snow, dirt, or even on land is just not a great idea. Many shots will be from Zodiacs or off the back of the ship, long lens is good! Just my two cents worth.

george19

My thought process exactly. I brought 24-85 and 70-300 on two bodies for my Galapagos trip, and pretty much all other travel after…and hardly used the 70-300.

I now own a 200-500, but don’t think it will work well for traveling because of the weight (and infrastructure…tripod gear). I’m contemplating a short zoom…24-30…and if/when I get it will figure out how it will fit in the travel mix.

Wish I could be more help.

If you are in Ushuaia, Chez Manu on the road to the glacier is very good. And the Argentine barbecue place on the side street off the east end of San Martin was a great value…better than the one on San Martin, and only a dollar more.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

For the lights you would definitely miss the 14, and if you are going on the ice at all the 14 would most certainly be useful. I personally don't understand why someone going on the trip of a lifetime would leave any lenses behind...I've been in the Arctic five times and always had everything I could: fisheye, 14-24, 24-105 and 100-400 plus doubler, as well as a 50mm f1.2. Here's one with the 14, shot for video

(Download)

mikedent Loc: Florida

https://www.swoop-antarctica.com/travel/photography

Thanks for posting this video. We are going in 3 weeks and this was a good refresher. Full frame lenses do get heavy, can't afford to buy new m4/3 bodies and lenses just now to save weight. Nikon 810, 7500, 24-105, 100-400, GoPro, Canon p+s. Dry bag and backpack. OP- have a great trip!!

jscharp

Good Luck with your trip. I am going to Antarctica end of January. I am taking 2 camera Bodies Canon R5 & R7,
3 lenses 14-35 f4, 24-105 f4 and 100-500 f4.5-7.1, 1.4x &2x teleconverter. I will post pictures and comments on my return. Mid February.

mlhoff Loc: Cincinnati, OH

I just got back about a month ago from Muench workshop and if I didn't have my 200-600 and 100-400 I would have cried. At least 80% of my shots were with these 2 lenses. Maybe 15% with a 24-105 and 5 % with a 12-24. These are all Sony lens.
By far the majority of your shots will be taken from the boat and I found the 100-400 to be the best for taking landscapes (Mountain/Glaicerscapes). Everything down there is so vast that it can be overwhelming with shorter lenses. Even on the islands with all the new penguin safety protocols in place the long lens will be your most used. You may find the 24-200 to be the most useful in the zodiacs. One suggestion use at least a 3 shot burst with camera on manual with auto ISO to help negate the movement of the seas. We were blessed almost perfect weather so light was never an issue.
I'm sure you will have a great trip, definitely use a patch on the Southern Passage. Also if your leaving out of Ushuaia be forewarned that Aerlineas Argentinas is probably the worls's most unreliable airline so be sure to allow a couple of extra days for cancellations. Our flights changed about 8 times with the last ones only days before we left. We were supposed to arrive 3 days early and ended up 2 nights. If you arrive early the Tierra del Fuego area is beautiful on it's on, hire a taxi for a tour of the National Park it's only about $100. Adding a day in Buenos Aires on the way home is very nice as well, we used a guide service called Gyde & Seek and it was great.

Culverville Island 100-400mm

(Download)

Brown Skua 100-400


Lion Island 100-400

(Download)

Taken onboard MV Sea Spirit 100-400

(Download)

worldcycle Loc: Stateline, Nevada

After going myself a few years ago to Antarctica, South Georgia and the Falklands, I would bring everything but the 1.4 converter and possibly the 14mm. I took a 16-35 (plenty wide), 24-105 (covered most shots) 70-200, 70-300 and a nifty 50. If you’re on an expedition ship a getting onshore, you are literally walking through and with the wildlife. The birds in flight are either right next to the ship or so close that you do not need super long, the 100-400 will be plenty. Never a problem with lighting, plenty of ambient light, never really had to push up the ISO. I used two bodies, one on a sling and one in a Cotton carrier when on shore. Took them on the zodiac in a whitewater dry bag that had pack straps so I could carry it and my other assorted gear (batteries, hat, gloves, extra lens, lens cleaner while on shore)
While on board I just had a shoulder bag and changed out as needed. Check out my Antarctica section on my web page, my link is below.