Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA

This is the kit I will be taking to Alaska in May. It will give me a range of 14mm to 1050mm. Originally my plan was to take only 4 lenses -- z14-30, z24-120, 300 PF, 200-500. All these lenses will work with the z7 with the adaptor. The problem I foresaw was that if the z7 went down, I would only have a focal length of 300-1050 to work with, which would not do for town and landscape shots. I added the 24-85 so at least this would give me a range of 36-127.5. I know this kit looks heavy but it weighs slightly less than 23 lbs. Some of you may question why I would include the 300PF lens when that range is covered by the 200-500. The 300 may be the sharpest lens in my bag and on the D500 will give me a range of 450-630 (with the 1.4). That means on some excursions I may leave the 200-500 in my room which will lighten the backpack by 5 lbs. I will also bring a waist-pack that will hold a flash and one lens. When walking around town, I will take only the z7 with the 24-120, and carry in the waist-pack the 14-30, a couple of extra batteries, polarizer filters, and a flash.

UTMike Loc: South Jordan, UT

You are ready, Mike! Now we expect many posts.

Gampa

In my humble opinion (and having made three cruises with excursions to Alaska) … I’d say you could travel much lighter, remain nimble, and get any shot you’d like.
A full frame and a crop sensor Canon bodies with 24-105 & 100-400 lenses (with CP & ND filters) proved to cover all the scenarios I needed.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

why the light meter ? Personally I would also leave behind the 300mm I have found when traveling... lighter is better. But that's just me

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

Hi Mike,

How will you be traveling in Alaska?
Mark

Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA

Thanks for that info. I'm considering getting the z180-600 lens. If I do that, I will only take three lenses -- the 14-30, the 24-120, and the 180-600. I would leave the 300 PF since the 180-600 is getting really good reviews. I would add the z6ii for the D500. I know this would cut my max tele view from 1050 to 600 but with the z7 at 45 mpx. I could crop in enough to simulate 700-800 on the crop sensor D500. I know the z7 can be put in crop mode which would get me to 900 but I think this would increase the noise. If you were happy with the 100-400 that means you had a range from 24-600 with your full and crop sensor bodies. I could perhaps leave the 200-500 home and just go with the 300 PF. With the 1.4 this would get me up to 630 at f 5.6 and give me a range of 14-630. I think in the next couple of months I will test the kit as shown and then with the 200-500 left out to see if that 5 lb reduction is noticeable.

Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA

Cruise with side excursions by car and train.

Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA

I anticipate a lot of white, especially in the glacier areas. A good incident meter reading could be more accurate than in-camera readings. As for the 300, I'm thinking the opposite -- if I leave the much heavier 200-500 at home, I could still get to 630mm using the 300 and a 1.4 on a crop sensor body. From some of the responses I'm getting, around 600mm is enough reach for a trip to Alaska.

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

I have only three experiences to relate to you:
1. A land/cruise tour of Alaska in 2005 - Carried 40lbs. of photography equipment in a backpack. Loved the experience. Far too much equipment.
2. 2006 land cruise tour of France, Italy and around the boot of the Mediterranean. Wonderful, but far too much equipment.
3. 2018 - River cruise from Prague to Budapest. Fabulous!! Sony RX10 IV. Did not miss any photos. It was the best experience.

Enjoy the trip, Mike!!
Mark

btbg

That's your choice but what I'm taking next week to Alaska is a 150-600 70-200 24-70 105F1.4 A SECO D 70-200 because one is for a z9 the other is for a d850 and I will also take a P1000 just in case.

Not a cruise and that makes a big difference. Will be shooting eagles fishing sea otters bear and landscapes mostly. Need the big lenses for the wildlife and the other lenses for everything else.

Big lenses are invaluable in Alaska as is wide angle. You don't have to take everything with you every time you go out bit it really helps when you need it. Tripod can be critical also if you aren't on a boat.

btbg

It's not enough reach if you are serious about wildlife. Even at 1050 you may have to crop if you see a bear on the beach at a distance. Bigger is always better for birds as well and they will sometimes follow boats.

What ports are you stopping in? My daughter sister and mom all live in southeast Alaska and we lived in Haines for three years so depending on where you are stopping I might be able to give you info that may not be available on line.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

Yes, Yes, 90% of the time for long travel trips I just take my RX10iv and RX100v as backup. I leave the A1 or A9 and 40 lbs of equipment behind. Now if Nation GEO was paying then that is different....

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

I understand. I find it much quicker to use exposure compensation rather than an external light meter. Your Z is mirrorless so leave the exposure meter behind and use the built in Exposure compensation, what you see is what you get. It's a little harder to use on your other camera because you have to go into live view. I'm surprised you don't trust the built in meter. When I lived in Alaska. I rarely found glaciers to be pure white except after a recent snowfall. There is plenty of moraine (dirt and rocks) on the glaciers as well as deep crevasses, which lean towards blue. As always, take a shot, evaluate it, then compensate as needed. Enjoy your trip.., Don't let photography get in the way of enjoying the trip. Memories are always properly exposed.

Gampa

👍👍

Smudgey Loc: Ohio, Calif, Now Arizona

I have been there twice and most of the suggestions about traveling lighter are correct. Be sure to take some sort of rain protection for your camera and lens for while you are shooting. They are not expensive, and they weigh nothing. I used one in Alaska while shooting Glaciers falling into the ocean and it was sprinkling on me while I was shooting, believe me it rains in Alaska. I was really glad I had it. Not sure why you need a light meter.