Camera choice for Alaska: Going to Alaska on the 6th of September for two weeks. No cruise - renting a car, taking day tours, hiking, etc.. I have a Nikon D7100 with a 55-300mm lens...

brooklyncarole Loc: New York

Going to Alaska on the 6th of September for two weeks. No cruise - renting a car, taking day tours, hiking, etc.. I have a Nikon D7100 with a 55-300mm lens and a fuji x T2 with a 55-200mm lens and want to choose only one camera. I've been using the fuji much more lately because it weighs so much less. I have many other lenses for each but I'm concerned about having distance. Which would you suggest taking?

Daryl New Loc: Wellington,New Zealand

Stick with the Fuji,lightness.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

If distance is your primary objective, of the two, why not the Nikon with the 55-300?
(Unless the Fuji is an APS-C and the Nikon is not.)

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

brooklyncarole wrote:

Going to Alaska on the 6th of September for two weeks. No cruise - renting a car, taking day tours, hiking, etc.. I have a Nikon D7100 with a 55-300mm lens and a fuji x T2 with a 55-200mm lens and want to choose only one camera. I've been using the fuji much more lately because it weighs so much less. I have many other lenses for each but I'm concerned about having distance. Which would you suggest taking?

You really want both, and there is no good reason not to take both.

While you are driving the size of the camera makes no difference. Having them both handy gives you an immediate easy choice.

For excursions away from the car you can pick the best camera for the circumstance each time. And it will often make a huge difference.

Some subjects, for example wildlife, will need the longest lens you have. But for some hikes the lightest weight camera is best. Alaska is full of both types of opportunities!

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

Apaflo wrote:

You really want both, and there is no good reason ... (show quote)

Those are my thoughts, exactly. If you can get them on the plane, definitely take both. While I!m not lucky enough to live in Alaska (like some of our members!!), my husband and I have been a couple of times. Like you, we rented a car and drove ourselves. We did lots of hiking, and I packed my D5200, D7200, various lenses for my Nikons, Canon SX50, and a point and shoot in the car. Never had to kick myself for not having what I needed in the car. Put whatever I felt was best for the activity in my Lowepro backpack, and off we went.

Enjoy your trip. Wosh I were going along!

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

brooklyncarole wrote:

Going to Alaska on the 6th of September for two weeks. No cruise - renting a car, taking day tours, hiking, etc.. I have a Nikon D7100 with a 55-300mm lens and a fuji x T2 with a 55-200mm lens and want to choose only one camera. I've been using the fuji much more lately because it weighs so much less. I have many other lenses for each but I'm concerned about having distance. Which would you suggest taking?

Between the two, you're missing wide angle, which is a real necessity in a magnificent state like Alaska. I'd take the Fuji for weight considerations, and get a 16-55 lens.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Since you'l be going by car, take what you think you'll need, but don't leave a reasonably wide angle lens behind. You'll be up here during the peak of the Fall colors, and a wide angle lens wil be indespensible. Don't lose out on some great landscapes for want of a wide angle lens. And I think the Fuji will be a great camera to take. That 55-200 lens wil give you the 35mm equivalent of 77--300mm, which will give you plenty of reach. I do have to agree with Apaflo, though.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Wingpilot wrote:

Since you'l be going by car, take what you think you'll need, but don't leave a reasonably wide angle lens behind. You'll be up here during the peak of the Fall colors, and a wide angle lens wil be indespensible. Don't lose out on some great landscapes for want of a wide angle lens. And I think the Fuji will be a great camera to take. That 55-200 lens wil give you the 35mm equivalent of 77--300mm, which will give you plenty of reach. I do have to agree with Apaflo, though.

The OP needs both cameras, but definitely needs a wide angle lens for each!

Alaska is a huge place and can't be pigeoned holed as one type needing only one camera or lens.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Apaflo wrote:

The OP needs both cameras, but definitely needs a wide angle lens for each!

Alaska is a huge place and can't be pigeoned holed as one type needing only one camera or lens.

Agreed!

jcboy3

brooklyncarole wrote:

Going to Alaska on the 6th of September for two weeks. No cruise - renting a car, taking day tours, hiking, etc.. I have a Nikon D7100 with a 55-300mm lens and a fuji x T2 with a 55-200mm lens and want to choose only one camera. I've been using the fuji much more lately because it weighs so much less. I have many other lenses for each but I'm concerned about having distance. Which would you suggest taking?

I recommend you take both. As with any major trip, you should have a backup camera that will give similar quality results in case something happens. And these are both crop sensor cameras, so the Nikon has better reach, but the Fuji is better for walking around.

I prefer a backup of the same make, or at least manufacturer, so that lenses can be shared. I would pick up a used second body. That also helps a great deal with shooting options; you can put a wide angle on one, telephoto on the other, and you don't have to change lenses if you're shooting a landscape and a bear wanders into view.

You can grab the other camera, get the shot, and get back into the car before you get eaten. The cost of the second body is a small price to pay for that kind of security.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

brooklyncarole wrote:

Going to Alaska on the 6th of September for two weeks. No cruise - renting a car, taking day tours, hiking, etc.. I have a Nikon D7100 with a 55-300mm lens and a fuji x T2 with a 55-200mm lens and want to choose only one camera. I've been using the fuji much more lately because it weighs so much less. I have many other lenses for each but I'm concerned about having distance. Which would you suggest taking?

Fuji, as you seem to like the use of it better, using it more thus your skill set with it is better honed and familiarity with a piece of equipment is valuable under conditions that could go south is critical.

sueyeisert Loc: New Jersey

Daryl New wrote:

Stick with the Fuji,lightness.

MTG44 Loc: Corryton, Tennessee

Was there in May. Take full frame one if you have it. I would take both.

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

brooklyncarole wrote:

Going to Alaska on the 6th of September for two weeks. No cruise - renting a car, taking day tours, hiking, etc.. I have a Nikon D7100 with a 55-300mm lens and a fuji x T2 with a 55-200mm lens and want to choose only one camera. I've been using the fuji much more lately because it weighs so much less. I have many other lenses for each but I'm concerned about having distance. Which would you suggest taking?

I like to use a point and shoot camera that I can put in my belt pouch so I am hands free to enjoy my trip. My favorite travel camera is the Sony HX90V, it has a pop up viewfinder, great for outdoors and a 24-720 Zeiss T* lens. It also has a pop up flash. My advice for travel has always been, "travel right, travel right".

Wanda Krack Loc: Tennessee, USA

For wildlife, you will need your longest lens, especially if you travel through Denali NP (usually the animals are at a long distance away). Wide angle is best for scenics and landscapes, but it is nice to also have the zoom option.