Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Light packing restrictions on Alaska trip
Page 1 of 3 next> last>>
Feb 16, 2018 08:50:12   #
andymac
 
In August we will be traveling on an alumni trip to Alaska including Denali NWR, the southeastern coast via boat and an air trip to the Artic Circle. We are very excited about the trip!

We are weight limited and on the size of our luggage so - in order to keep warm and not wear the same close every day just to be able to carry more photo gear I am wrestling with what of my current gear to take vs exchanging or buying something else. I have a just purchased D500 that will be my one camera. I have a Nikon 18-300 & Nikon 12-24, a Tamron 150-600, Sigma 105 macro and lenses I won't take (sigh) are my Nikon 300 and 500 - to big and heavy. My Nikon 18-300 serves well as a macro, so one option to cover everything from macro to landscapes to birds/wildlife is the 18-300 and Tamron 150-600. No further expense required.

I have a travel tripod, but it likely will be a casualty of the limited. May sneak in a mono-pod.

I have been studying reviews of the new Tamron 18-400 with the idea that this would cover the landscape and wildlife which replaces the larger 150-600 for wildlife. I'd use the Sigma for macro work. Additional but reasonable costs for the new Tamron 18-400.

At the core of my research is - will I loose too much sharpness on bird photos with the 18-400 vs 150-600. I've also looked at the Nikon 80-400 as an option for wildlife. It seems to have slightly better sharpness at 400, but is also more costly. If I go with either of these lenses I'd take the Nikon 18-300 for landscape and macro work.

I am hoping for at least a few good bald eagle ops and other likely distant subjects and don't want to be disappointed with the results.

Please share thoughts on my options or propose other options I haven't thought of.

Thanks

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 09:03:49   #
Howard5252 Loc: New York / Florida (now)
 
First a few questions. Is this a bus tour? Will you be hiking? Is Brooks Falls on your itinerary?
In general take the biggest lens you can - wild life may be on the road or halfway up a mountain.
You have the right idea with the 18~300 and the 150~600 IF IF IF you have a window seat on the
bus for the big lens. I recently came back from Alaska and I took with me an 18~300 and a Sony
RX10 iii to act as my telephoto. If you have questions, you can PM me.
Since you mention packing restrictions, it sounds like you will be flying in a small aircraft. If you
are reasonable with your clothing, you can take pretty much anything you want. For instance a
50 pound suitcase is really heavy - it means you've got a lot of stuff.

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 09:13:49   #
rbmartiniv Loc: Nacogdoches, TX
 
I went on a similar Alaska trip last summer. I only took my D7000 and my Nikkor 18-300 lens. You will probably use 18mm more than 300mm but it's nice to have. A few of the photos I took are on my Smugmug page along with some of the Canadian Rockies on same trip.

Reply
 
 
Feb 16, 2018 09:19:13   #
UncleBuck Loc: Malvern, Arkansas
 
As a suggestion, consider the Tamron 100-400, less than 1/2 the cost of the Nikon 80-400 and significantly lighter, downside being it's 6.3 at the long end vs the Nikon's 5.6. Reviews indicate it's sharper than the Nikon at 400.
andymac wrote:
In August we will be traveling on an alumni trip to Alaska including Denali NWR, the southeastern coast via boat and an air trip to the Artic Circle. We are very excited about the trip!

We are weight limited and on the size of our luggage so - in order to keep warm and not wear the same close every day just to be able to carry more photo gear I am wrestling with what of my current gear to take vs exchanging or buying something else. I have a just purchased D500 that will be my one camera. I have a Nikon 18-300 & Nikon 12-24, a Tamron 150-600, Sigma 105 macro and lenses I won't take (sigh) are my Nikon 300 and 500 - to big and heavy. My Nikon 18-300 serves well as a macro, so one option to cover everything from macro to landscapes to birds/wildlife is the 18-300 and Tamron 150-600. No further expense required.

I have a travel tripod, but it likely will be a casualty of the limited. May sneak in a mono-pod.

I have been studying reviews of the new Tamron 18-400 with the idea that this would cover the landscape and wildlife which replaces the larger 150-600 for wildlife. I'd use the Sigma for macro work. Additional but reasonable costs for the new Tamron 18-400.

At the core of my research is - will I loose too much sharpness on bird photos with the 18-400 vs 150-600. I've also looked at the Nikon 80-400 as an option for wildlife. It seems to have slightly better sharpness at 400, but is also more costly. If I go with either of these lenses I'd take the Nikon 18-300 for landscape and macro work.

I am hoping for at least a few good bald eagle ops and other likely distant subjects and don't want to be disappointed with the results.

Please share thoughts on my options or propose other options I haven't thought of.

Thanks
In August we will be traveling on an alumni trip t... (show quote)

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 09:19:28   #
rbmartiniv Loc: Nacogdoches, TX
 
Great photos, Howard!

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 09:21:56   #
deer2ker Loc: Nashville, TN
 
Really enjoyed your SmugMug page - beautifully done - and I really appreciate your post processing!
rbmartiniv wrote:
I went on a similar Alaska trip last summer. I only took my D7000 and my Nikkor 18-300 lens. You will probably use 18mm more than 300mm but it's nice to have. A few of the photos I took are on my Smugmug page along with some of the Canadian Rockies on same trip.

Reply
Feb 16, 2018 10:51:07   #
rbmartiniv Loc: Nacogdoches, TX
 
Thanks for the kind words. I appreciate the compliment.

Reply
 
 
Feb 16, 2018 11:53:37   #
rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA
 
Consider a Platypod

https://platypod.com/

Reply
Feb 17, 2018 00:13:21   #
via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP
 
andymac wrote:
In August we will be traveling on an alumni trip to Alaska including Denali NWR, the southeastern coast via boat and an air trip to the Artic Circle. We are very excited about the trip!

We are weight limited and on the size of our luggage so - in order to keep warm and not wear the same close every day just to be able to carry more photo gear I am wrestling with what of my current gear to take vs exchanging or buying something else. I have a just purchased D500 that will be my one camera. I have a Nikon 18-300 & Nikon 12-24, a Tamron 150-600, Sigma 105 macro and lenses I won't take (sigh) are my Nikon 300 and 500 - to big and heavy. My Nikon 18-300 serves well as a macro, so one option to cover everything from macro to landscapes to birds/wildlife is the 18-300 and Tamron 150-600. No further expense required.

I have a travel tripod, but it likely will be a casualty of the limited. May sneak in a mono-pod.

I have been studying reviews of the new Tamron 18-400 with the idea that this would cover the landscape and wildlife which replaces the larger 150-600 for wildlife. I'd use the Sigma for macro work. Additional but reasonable costs for the new Tamron 18-400.

At the core of my research is - will I loose too much sharpness on bird photos with the 18-400 vs 150-600. I've also looked at the Nikon 80-400 as an option for wildlife. It seems to have slightly better sharpness at 400, but is also more costly. If I go with either of these lenses I'd take the Nikon 18-300 for landscape and macro work.

I am hoping for at least a few good bald eagle ops and other likely distant subjects and don't want to be disappointed with the results.

Please share thoughts on my options or propose other options I haven't thought of.

Thanks
In August we will be traveling on an alumni trip t... (show quote)


I went to Alaska to photography grizzly bears while wading in the stream among them. I took my Nikon 80-400 and my Tamron 150-600 and a sturdy tripod, among other things. Slipped in the water on the first evening and the Tamron clouded up and stayed that way the entire four days there. I used the 80-400 and the shots were ok; would have been better with a longer lens. Used my Nikon 24-120 for landscapes. But I went there to photograph animals primarily and the longer lenses are best for that. I was camping in 30 degree weather and sleeping in a mummy bag so my clothes were not much of an issue. Just needed to be sure I had two pair of pants so one could dry out if needed; it was so cold at night my wet socks froze! Had to struggle into still wet, half frozen waders each morning. Had a blast, loved every minute of it, such a kick to be out among the grizzles right in the water.

Reply
Feb 17, 2018 06:25:31   #
billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
 
andymac wrote:
In August we will be traveling on an alumni trip to Alaska including Denali NWR, the southeastern coast via boat and an air trip to the Artic Circle. We are very excited about the trip!

We are weight limited and on the size of our luggage so - in order to keep warm and not wear the same close every day just to be able to carry more photo gear I am wrestling with what of my current gear to take vs exchanging or buying something else. I have a just purchased D500 that will be my one camera. I have a Nikon 18-300 & Nikon 12-24, a Tamron 150-600, Sigma 105 macro and lenses I won't take (sigh) are my Nikon 300 and 500 - to big and heavy. My Nikon 18-300 serves well as a macro, so one option to cover everything from macro to landscapes to birds/wildlife is the 18-300 and Tamron 150-600. No further expense required.

I have a travel tripod, but it likely will be a casualty of the limited. May sneak in a mono-pod.

I have been studying reviews of the new Tamron 18-400 with the idea that this would cover the landscape and wildlife which replaces the larger 150-600 for wildlife. I'd use the Sigma for macro work. Additional but reasonable costs for the new Tamron 18-400.

At the core of my research is - will I loose too much sharpness on bird photos with the 18-400 vs 150-600. I've also looked at the Nikon 80-400 as an option for wildlife. It seems to have slightly better sharpness at 400, but is also more costly. If I go with either of these lenses I'd take the Nikon 18-300 for landscape and macro work.

I am hoping for at least a few good bald eagle ops and other likely distant subjects and don't want to be disappointed with the results.

Please share thoughts on my options or propose other options I haven't thought of.

Thanks
In August we will be traveling on an alumni trip t... (show quote)


On my trip to Alaska I took my two pockets, the Sony RX100M2 with the Zeiss 28-100 1.8 lens and the Sony Hx 90V with the Zeiss 24-720 mm zoom. Both have belt pouches to allow me to walk hands free. TRAVEL RIGHT, TRAVEL LITE. It is the ONLY way to travel, trust me.

Reply
Feb 17, 2018 06:37:29   #
LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field
 
billnikon wrote:
On my trip to Alaska I took my two pockets, the Sony RX100M2 with the Zeiss 28-100 1.8 lens and the Sony Hx 90V with the Zeiss 24-720 mm zoom. Both have belt pouches to allow me to walk hands free. TRAVEL RIGHT, TRAVEL LITE. It is the ONLY way to travel, trust me.



Reply
 
 
Feb 17, 2018 07:04:09   #
sueyeisert Loc: New Jersey
 
You need a zoom that at least goes too 400mm. I used 2 cameras there one with an 18-135mm lens with a Fuji x-pro2. My OlympusEm-5 had a 75-300mm lens. I like 2 cameras so your not switching lenses.

Reply
Feb 17, 2018 07:36:31   #
Blaster34 Loc: Florida Treasure Coast
 
andymac wrote:
In August we will be traveling on an alumni trip to Alaska including Denali NWR, the southeastern coast via boat and an air trip to the Artic Circle. We are very excited about the trip!

We are weight limited and on the size of our luggage so - in order to keep warm and not wear the same close every day just to be able to carry more photo gear I am wrestling with what of my current gear to take vs exchanging or buying something else. I have a just purchased D500 that will be my one camera. I have a Nikon 18-300 & Nikon 12-24, a Tamron 150-600, Sigma 105 macro and lenses I won't take (sigh) are my Nikon 300 and 500 - to big and heavy. My Nikon 18-300 serves well as a macro, so one option to cover everything from macro to landscapes to birds/wildlife is the 18-300 and Tamron 150-600. No further expense required.

I have a travel tripod, but it likely will be a casualty of the limited. May sneak in a mono-pod.

I have been studying reviews of the new Tamron 18-400 with the idea that this would cover the landscape and wildlife which replaces the larger 150-600 for wildlife. I'd use the Sigma for macro work. Additional but reasonable costs for the new Tamron 18-400.

At the core of my research is - will I loose too much sharpness on bird photos with the 18-400 vs 150-600. I've also looked at the Nikon 80-400 as an option for wildlife. It seems to have slightly better sharpness at 400, but is also more costly. If I go with either of these lenses I'd take the Nikon 18-300 for landscape and macro work.

I am hoping for at least a few good bald eagle ops and other likely distant subjects and don't want to be disappointed with the results.

Please share thoughts on my options or propose other options I haven't thought of.

Thanks
In August we will be traveling on an alumni trip t... (show quote)


Was in Alaska last year, late May, worst weather they had in decades, cold, rain, blizzards. But as for Eagles, never needed anything more than 400mm and that was plenty.....they were all along the Anchorage/Seward Highway and as many as 20 at a time in trees along the road, also gorging on Hooligans and other seafood choices in Turnagain Arm.

Denali will be most likely by bus since POV's are restricted so carrying large lenses is not an issue, however getting a good seat is. Drivers will stop for wildlife so you have that option to get out and walk around. Even the Grizzlies were relatively close to our bus in Denali. A few long range shots up the mountain but like most have said, they will only be about 5-10% of your shots. Boat trips in Prince William Sound or other areas will take you right up to the Glaciers so long Tele's aren't necessarily needed. Enjoy and I can't wait to go back for another trip

Reply
Feb 17, 2018 07:43:59   #
sb Loc: Florida's East Coast
 
Clothing: layer, layer, layer, and don't forget a stocking hat! Microfiber long underwear is very lightweight and will dry overnight if washed in the sink.

Reply
Feb 17, 2018 08:20:48   #
Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC
 
We've driven to AK twice, 80% of our shots were taken from the RV with a Nikor 18-300 3.5/5.6. I would suggest buying a noodle, cut a couple 8 inches long and slit, slide on the window, cheap and effective. When the bears are chasing salmon I used the 150-600 with a mono. Just have fun.

Reply
Page 1 of 3 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.