imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Unless you are working for NatGeo, - Sony RX10 IV ......leave everything else at home and ENJOY the trip !
.

KenProspero

FWIW -- I'll be going to Galapagos in Feb.

As of now, here is what I plan on taking with me.

Nikon Z-5 Body. Nikkor 24-200 f/4-6.3 Lens; Fuji Point and Shoot rated to 20 meters depth (for snorkelling). Tripod and/or monopod (probably).

In my case, I'll be on a catamaran with a group of strangers, and it's not specifically a photo trip, so I'm concerned with time for lens changes/set up, etc. and will make do with the travel lens.

Miamark Loc: Florida

You have way too much equipment. Having been to the Galápagos Islands and to Ecuador several times the 24-105 will be the most useful. You do not need a tripod. On the islands you will be right on top of the birds. In fact, you will have to be careful not to step on them. The 70-200 also will be useful for birds in flight, for the marine iguanas and for birds on top of rocks. As to Quito. It depends what you like to shoot. For people pix the 24-105 is fine. If you want to take pictures of buildings then you might need a wider lens but it is was me, I would not use it. As to two bodies, I think that it will be a lot to carry around on the Islands because you will be on your feet all day; however, you may want to bring two and leave one on the boat. I would be cautious about advice from people who have not been to the Galápagos Islands. You silk be surprised at the amazing ohoto opportunities with minimal equipment.

Bill McKenna

I just got back from the Galapagos Islands two weeks ago. I took 2 Nikon bodies and 5 lenses, one of which was my 200-500mm Nikon lens. It came out of the case exactly one day...the first day. I realized that 95% of what I wanted to shoot could be done with my 70-200mm Nikon lens. I was correct. The animals are so close to you that big lenses are not needed. You can shoot most everything with a 200mm lens. I would also take a wide angle lens. Make sure you take plenty of storage...you'll need it! Also, I never used my tripod once. I only took two bodies to have a backup, and never used my Nikon D500...not even once. I shot everything on my Nikon D850.

Darlargo

Take the 24-105 and the 70-200. That's all you will need. The animals will come to you. If you have a waterproof camera or Go Pro you will see Sea Lions and Penguins in the water even when you snorkel. You can start to smile now because that's all you will be doing on your trip.

Robg

I have been to Quito, Galapagos, Macchu Piccu, and many other places. Always with a bridge camera and inexpensive waterproof Fuji. You will really appreciate the mobility, e.g., for getting in and out of a rocking zodiac and at the higher altitudes in Quito and other places in the Andes, you don’t want to be carrying a lot of weight. The Fuji was important to have along in Galapagos, particularly when I got to play in the water with a group of seals!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Since a trip to the Galapagos would be a once-in-a-lifetime event for me, I'd want to be able to take the best photos possible. Based on that I would take the four Canon lenses and the extender (which you're likely never going to need, but it doesn't take up much room or add much weight). Of the four Canon lenses, probably the least "necessary" will be the 300mm. Everything I've heard says the wildlife on the Galapagos are so accustomed to the touristas that you can get really close and are unlikely to need a longer telephoto. Probably the 70-200mm would be sufficient. (However, my 300mm is one of my most used lenses... so much so that I have 3 of them! I'd only very reluctantly leave it at home.)

If you don't have them, I'd also want a set of Macro Extension Tubes. Those would allow close-ups with the 70-200 or 24-105. They also don't add much weight or take up much space... and cost a lot less than an actual macro lens.

Quality circular polarizing filter(s), particularly for the 10-18mm and 24-105mm, might come in handy. B+W XS-Pro and F-Pro are top quality at reasonable prices available from a lot of places. Shooting close to the ocean where there's "salt air" is one of the few places I will fit a "protection" filter. I usually shoot without any "protection", but I do always use a lens hood (got them for all your lenses?) The filter is much easier to clean than the lens. Speaking of which, I'd have lens cleaning and sensor cleaning supplies in my bag, too. I always tuck a few micro fiber cloths in my bag. I get the terry cloth type in bulk from my local auto parts store... Larger and much cheaper than the ones sold for photographers. When fresh and clean they can be used on lens optics, but after a couple of those uses they still come in handy to dust off cameras and lens barrels.

When traveling I always take some extra lens caps, front and back. Of course, extra batteries, charger(s), voltage converters, plenty of memory cards and possibly a portable backup drive are all important.

DEFINITELY get a waterproof bag for your gear. I haven't been there myself, but have discussed the Galapagos with other photographers and they all said you REALLY need to protect your gear from splash going to and from the ship in smaller boats or inflatables. Some of the waterproof gear bags also provide flotation, in case anything goes overboard.

I usually pack an accessory flash. Yes, your camera and some of my cameras have built in flashes.... but they suck and drain the camera's battery rapidly.

When I travel, most of my gear gets carried on. I only put pretty durable things like tripods in checked bags. I had flashes smashed when in checked bags.

To make carrying my gear onto the airplane easier, I often wear a vest and/or coat with lots of pockets, for the small stuff and the things that are likely to need hand inspection at the TSA screening. My "photo" vest is actually a fishing vest from a sporting goods store that cost $25... rather than spend $100 or more for a photo vest that does exactly the same thing. My cameras and lenses go in a backpack that fits into the overhead bin (the airline can tell you their maximum size).

And, I don't know the weather there right now, but would also pack some rain sleeves for my gear as well as a few cheap, lightweight plastic ponchos for myself. (I HAVE been caught out in the rain on other trips, with no shelter in sight for me or my gear. It really sucked!)

Some other responses have suggested snorkeling or other activities where you really might want a waterproof camera, if it's in your budget. There are probably underwater housings for the gear you have, but they're extremely expensive. Something like the Olympus TG-6 or Ricoh WG-70 can be used to 40 or 50 foot depths, so would be fine for most snorkelers.

Rchriso

My wife and have been to the Galapagos, Antarctica, Alaska, and a 28 day Safari in Kenya,Zambezi, and South Africa. She has Canon EOS MarkII, I use a Nikon D7500 and a Nikon Coolpix 1000. For lenses, we found that the Tamron 18 - 400 lense was perfect.
On all the trips, it fit the need for convenience, portability, great shots. No need to carry all the gear. The lense and cameras were fast enough to not need a tripod— tough to handle in small boats, zodiac rafts and beach landings.

JBRIII

The Penguins I saw were like trying to follow a guided missile at point blank range. Sea Lions played games as if I was an object to circle. Twisted me in knots trying to photo then. Fish, starfish of every shape and color and turtles out the yahoo. Better than Hawaii or Tahiti for me. I'd plan to return just for the snorkeling. Makes me smile now just thinking of the trip, 10 days circuit, plan for the 14 next time.

Hanson

From my Galapagos experience, you need a long tele zoom for birds, a 70-200mm, and a 24-70mm for urban street photography (like in Quito). For Galapagos alone, you don't need WA lens. If you only want to carry 2 lenses, I suggest tele zoom and a 24-105 zoom.

zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas

I would completely agree if we were talking about a full-frame camera body. But OP uses crop-sensor bodies, so the 24-105mm will be like a 38-168mm lens, given the 1.6 Canon crop factor. I would recommend a wider lens, certainly for Quito.

OldShooter

Thanks one and all for the very valuable feedback. We are really looking forward to this bucket-list trip and I'll enjoy it much more with your advice. Hopefully I'll come back with at least one capture worth posting!

FSATIN Loc: Westchester, NY

I have been to both the Galapagos and Quito. I also am a Canon user. Check first with your tour group because there usually is a weight limit for cruising on the boats. That being said I used the 70-200 a lot when we landed on the islands and it worked great. You will be up close and personal with all the animals. The 18-300 might be a great walk a round lens for city use. Don't bring a tripod. If weight is no option for your tour and you want to take BIF then your big lens would be nice. On these types of trips less is more. Also bring a waterproof bag to transport your camera stuff on the zodiacs. Have fun, it is a great trip.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

classic320

I'm reading replies with interest as I too am heading for Quito, Galapagos, Machu Pichu, and Lima next month, a bucket list trip for sure. I am thinking of taking an APS body, 11-16, 18-50 and 100-300, along with a uw point'n' shoot and a 3D. I wonder if the 100-300 is really necessary? I have an 80-200 f 2.8 but its awfully heavy. Also a bridge camera for backup. Or should I leave the APS and lenses and just take the smaller cameras? I have gone with both strategies and both have advantages......And maybe a GoPro!