And the "hits" (tested and tried experience) just keep coming! Again thanks for the input. Your input is treasured, and saves me and my kind (novices) the hassle of finding out these things the hard and/or expensive way.
If you are happy with your 28-300 I would not worry about another lens. I personally didn't like my 28-300 and got rid of it. YMMV. I would have to be very confident in that 28-300 to put all my eggs in one basket, especially on what could turn into an epic road trip that may never be repeated.
Elmo55 wrote:
Taking trip out West this summer to Crater Lake (1st time), Columbia River Gorge (3rd time), and Glacier NP (many times), maybe Yellowstone (many times). Consequently, my goal is to try and get some landscapes (at least 1 or 2) that will qualify as "wall art", and I anticipate (do to circumstances beyond my control) that this will be my last trip/opportunity. Working with FX camera, 28-300 (3.5-5.6), 70-200 (2.8), and a 50 (1.8). Have acquired necessary hardware for shooting pano's (as that was my first thought), and studying and practicing with current gear (to see how each lens performs) before departure. The other consideration running around in my head (after watching many you tube videos), is that maybe a wide angle lens would be less time consuming, and just as effective (but smaller file size wise) as setting up and taking pano's (which would be larger files), and processing them. Cost is another consideration. Then the 64 thousand dollar question becomes: "do I really need to purchase and add a used 17-35 wide angle lens to my bag just for this trip, which I am inclined to believe will become extra weight in my bag after the trip?" Yes or No. Pertinent comments welcome. Thanks for your time and input. Elmo
P>S>: As I reread this I may have answered my own question, now I wait to see what you say.
Taking trip out West this summer to Crater Lake (1... (
show quote)
Borrowlenses.com and lensrentals.com are worth visiting. You can rent a wide angle for a fraction of the cost. It’s what pros do when they don’t have the right glass for a project.
Elmo55 wrote:
Taking trip out West this summer to Crater Lake (1st time), Columbia River Gorge (3rd time), and Glacier NP (many times), maybe Yellowstone (many times). Consequently, my goal is to try and get some landscapes (at least 1 or 2) that will qualify as "wall art", and I anticipate (do to circumstances beyond my control) that this will be my last trip/opportunity. Working with FX camera, 28-300 (3.5-5.6), 70-200 (2.8), and a 50 (1.8). Have acquired necessary hardware for shooting pano's (as that was my first thought), and studying and practicing with current gear (to see how each lens performs) before departure. The other consideration running around in my head (after watching many you tube videos), is that maybe a wide angle lens would be less time consuming, and just as effective (but smaller file size wise) as setting up and taking pano's (which would be larger files), and processing them. Cost is another consideration. Then the 64 thousand dollar question becomes: "do I really need to purchase and add a used 17-35 wide angle lens to my bag just for this trip, which I am inclined to believe will become extra weight in my bag after the trip?" Yes or No. Pertinent comments welcome. Thanks for your time and input. Elmo
P>S>: As I reread this I may have answered my own question, now I wait to see what you say.
Taking trip out West this summer to Crater Lake (1... (
show quote)
Yes and leave the super zoom home.
When I travel out west (or anywhere really) I always take my 16-35mm and 28-200mm Nikkors. If I have room in whichever bag I take, I may also take a 20mm, a 14mm, and/or a 70-300mm/28-300mm. The first 2 cover 90% of my landscapes. If I need more "reach", with my D850, high IQ cropping is always possible.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
