Jim Bob

WTF? What is the basis for your bias against those less than 70 years old (like Thom Hogan, for example)?

wilpharm Loc: Oklahoma

we were there 4 years ago...had 18-270 ...worked fine...a tripod would have been a pain...travel light!!! you do NOT need a bunch of lenses..

ricardo16

Just returned a couple weeks ago. You will almost always be with a "group", so travel with minimal gear. As the there won't be leisurely time to switch lenses, use a tripod, or make multiple exposures I would have the 24-105 as your primary set up. Can't emphasize the importance of taking the time to drop the camera and any other water sensitive devices in a simple dry bag. We did a lot of "wet landings" and witnessed a couple people getting swept to shore in the surf. Have a great trip....you will love the Islands.

canonjohn922 Loc: Vineland,NJ

I was in the Galapagos Islands in March this year. I carried two cameras pretty much the whole time, I had my 24-105 on my 5D and my 100-400 on my 7D II. The wildlife is use to people but you have to stay on the trails which made the 100-400 come in handy. I probably used the 7D 90% of the time. the zodiaks are usually wet on the bottom so a big zip lock bag for your backpack bottom is a must. Nobody in our group had a problem getting in and out of the zodiaks (paganos), our crew and guide were very helpful. Hiking wasn't too bad, a few rocky areas and slippery spots, most of my trip was on the beaches. Enjoy your trip, be safe and post a few pictures when you get back. Don't know if your into snorkeling but you might want to bring a waterproof P&S the sea life was awesome. Enjoy your trip, be safe and post a few pictures when you get back PS I'm only 67 and here's a few photos to wet you appetite, a blue footed boobie and a zodiak chasing the rainbow

(Download)


(Download)

george19

I did this trip in 2007, and it was amazing. 2 bodies is the way to go, and I found myself using the Nikkor 24 to 85 macro the most, particularly when ashore, so I kept that on the D200 most of the time. I kept the Nikkor 70 to 300 on the D100, and that got most use on the boat...but occasional birds in flight when ashore. Sometimes I wished for a little more reach, but not enough to invest in. So my choices are the 24-105 and the 100-400, with the shorter lens having priority on the better camera.

Yes...you can get close enough to the wildlife ashore that a short lens shouldn't be a problem. You might want to get some form of underwater rig for when snorkeling, if that is part of your trip. Serious recommendations are a knapsack with rubberized bottom (Swiss Army computer bag will work nicely), and knee pads. You might want to take a monopod, and think about a portable hard drive for backup storage. Our guide had a laptop, but I didn't take advantage of his offer. I'm still blown away by the photos I took.

JeffDavidson Loc: Originally Detroit Now Los Angeles

I would choose the faster 70-200 f2.8 as you cannot use flash for photographing the animals.

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

My husband and I were there in 2015 - ages 66 & 67 at that time. We were on a small boat (14 passengers plus crew and naturalist) for 2 weeks. After asking advice here on the Hog, I decided to take my Nikon D5200, Canon bridge camera (SX 50-HS), point and shoot, and an underwater point and shoot. The only lenses I took for my D5200 were my 55-300 kit lens and my 18-105. My Tamron 150-600 stayed at home. There was no need for it. The 55-300 stayed on the D5200 most of the time. The wildlife was so close that we almost tripped over the seals and the iguanas several times each day. The birds were very close to the trails. IMO, your 200mm reach should be just fine.

I always had 2 cameras with me for the landings - the D5200 and either the point and shoot or the SX50-HS. Our naturalist briefed us each evening on what we would be doing/seeing the next day, and I chose my gear based on that. My husband used only his Sony P&S and a GoPro for underwater. We snorkled once or twice a day in addition to one or two landings per day. By the third night, all 14 of us plus our naturalist were ready for bed before we even finished dinner. It was a wonderful trip.

I lugged a monopod but never used it. There was no real opportunity to use a tripod with our group. No one had one and no one missed not having one.

Make sure you carry your gear in something waterproof for when you are on the pangas (zodiacs). It's not so much the danger of spray as it is slipping during a "wet" landing. We had a couple of times when plastic bags saved our gear.

Feel free to PM me if you want to "talk".

Mike

JD750 Loc: SoCal

What a great opportunity, I am glad to hear you are going. Gives me hope.

Ok I'm not going to tell you which lenses, but rather how to plan what to take. I would want something to shoot close with, a normal lens, something telephoto, and something wide. That could be less than 4 lenses because good quality zooms serve dual purposes. You could get wide to normal with one zoom for example. And normal to tele with another zoom. That's 2 lenses. FYI - As far as telephoto, you want the fastest lens in your arsenal. And I would definitely want something to shoot close. My (Nikon) 24-70 f2.8, is not a Macro lens, but I can shoot pretty darn close with it. It would be a good compromise for a macro on a trip. Maybe you have a Canon lens that could serve a similar dual purpose?

Hopes that helps.

FYI - My travel kit is all Micro 4/3. The entire kit fits in a smaller bag than one big lens and my DSLR. Just saying...

Ksocha Loc: Bethesda, MD

We went to the Galapagos on The Grace in February. I used a Panasonic GX8. I had the Pany 12-35, 35-100, and the Panasonic-Leica 100-400 (rented). Except for a few landscape type shots the 100-400 almost never left the camera. Remember you have a great chance to get close to some wonderful animals. Up close and personal.

I also have the Canon 5D iii and numerous lenses. I didn't miss them, but don't worry about the weight too much if that's what you are used to as the Galapagos doesn't involve too many long walks.

You will want a decent "tough" camera for snorkeling. I used a Fuji, but the latest Olympus is probably a better choice.

Private message me if you want a link to my photos.

BTW, I'm also 70.

Ken

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Nice pics!

Fkaufman1 Loc: Florida

Thanks for all the great advise
Frank

Fkaufman1 Loc: Florida

Thanks for all the great advise
Frank

JeffR Loc: Rehoboth Beach, Delaware

Definitely leave the tripod home. I never found a use for it on the islands, and your group will resent you if they have to constantly wait for you. Some of the walks can be strenuous, so you won't want the weight either. Birds in flight would be the only use for a very long telephoto -- most of your shots will be fairly close range. One albatross built her nest right in the middle of the path and refused to budge, making everyone walk around her! I recommend taking a laptop with you for backups, quick editing, and emailing home. Don't expect to find any photo supplies for sale there. Our "wet landings" never involved water more than a foot deep, so just take a garbage bag to stuff your camera in for the few seconds it takes to disembark to protect from splashes. Definitely take your best camera -- you'll never get shots like this again!

dfrost01 Loc: Princeton, NJ

Don't bother carrying heavy telephoto stuff. You won't need it. The rangers tell you to stay about 10 feet away, but the animals will come right up to you, and that's ok. Flashes are not allowed. If you have an underwater camera, that may be useful. The water is cold, but the ships usually carry wetsuits.

Hsch39 Loc: Northbrook, Illinois

Attached is a photo I took with my 70-200mm @150mm. Take your 24-105mm and your 70-200 f/2.8 and you should be OK.