Greetings from an AAA (ardent Alaska admirer)-

Just two weeks ago, I retuned from a Juneau to Juneau modified inner passage cruise followed by a visit to Kantishna and Denali National Park in the hopes of capturing (photographically) some of the stunning beauty of our 50th state. My equipment on this trip: Nikon D800, Nikon 200-500mm, f5.6, and Nikon 24-120mm lenses. I was only moderately satisfied with the several photos I managed to take (from the deck of the small cruise ship, from the Denali road bus and from a short hike around Wonder Lake). I saw your magnificent collection of photos on UHH, further disappointing me in my own efforts. Wildlife, in particular proved to be a considerable challenge since, except for a wandering moose about 200 yards away from the Denali bus, wildlife, especially grizzlies, were several times that distance from my lenses. Knowing full well that photo quality is not purely a function of the gear one uses and that the "snapshot" approach that travel tour conditions can lead to limits photo quality, I am curious about the equipment that you used for these works of art. Or, which seems likely to me, is it more a matter of boots on the ground bringing one's camera closer to wildlife as well as patience and time providing the scenery, composition and lighting conditions that result in memorable Alaskan photos.

Greatly enjoyed your photos......

Sensor1

$250-750 is a pretty cheap lens these days.

I'd say the real question is "how good do you need it?"

In a previous job we had a machinist whose mantra was "Better is the enemy of good enough". He meant that if you tried to improve things you run the risk of screwing it up. But it could also be taken to mean something like "you can pay a lot of money for something that could be better, but in the end you might not be able to see the improvement."

Personally, my zoom lenses (Nikon) are good enough in sharpness terms. And they are much more flexible in operation than primes. But they all cost over $1000.