# Glacier National Park - New lens?



## Diverman (Jan 3, 2013)

Hello all,

I will be going to Glacier National Park In late July. I am planning on taking quite a few pictures, as I love traveling to the National Parks.

I have a t4i, 70-200 2.8 IS II, 18-135 IS, and the 25mm macro extension tubes.

I have two main questions concerning this trip.

First, should I look into purchasing (or perhaps renting) a specific wide angle? I hope I can upgrade to FF sometime, but this likely won't be until about 5 years down the road. The two options I was considering here are the 16-35 II and the 10-22. I understand the crop vs FF and everything, but is there a big quality difference? I also like to try some astrophotography, but either lens would be better than what I currently have as far as that is concerned (and besides, with the 600 rule and my crop body the not as fast lens should allow me to have brighter pictures, all things considered). Are there any sweeping landscapes at Glacier that beg for an ultra-wide angle shot? I'm not the best at panos, so I'd rather not count on that.

Secondly, should I add an extender for wildlife? If so, would the 1.4x III be enough? I have read many reviews that the 1.4x III is a better extender than the 2x III, but am definitely not opposed to the 2x III at all. If there is no need for an extender, I would rather save the money, but I definitely don't want to miss that moose/bear/bald eagle shot because I don't have one (or don't have the right one). 

Lastly, are there any locations that are a must? And is there any other specific gear that I "must" bring to have a successful trip?

Unfortunately, time is kind of a rush as the spectacular lens rebates are ending soon. Any advice is greatly appreciated!

Thanks!


----------



## rlaverty (Jan 3, 2013)

The 10-22 would serve you well in Glacier, the beauty of that place starts at your toes and goes on forever


----------



## FatDaddyJones (Jan 3, 2013)

Glacier, in my opinion, is the most beautiful and breathtaking place on earth... and I've traveled all over the world. First of all, there is nothing that will capture the grandeur of the landscape like being there, so don't forget to put your camera down every once in a while and just enjoy being there through the lenses of your own eyes. That being said, you'll want something wide to capture the expanse of the mountains. 18mm on a crop just doesn't cut it sometimes. The 10-22 would be a good choice and I'd recommend it over the 16-35 because you'll want to get as wide a shot as possible in some places. The last time my wife and I went to Glacier, the roads were closed to traffic because of snow (it was June). So instead, we went on a 40 mile hike on foot. That was the best thing that could have happened. You'll want to see the view at the top of Going to the Sun Road, and sights like Avalanche Gorge, but the real beauty will be the sights you find hidden around each corner and off the beaten path. I've never used extenders as I have the 70-300, but extra reach will come in handy when shooting wildlife, especially the big horn sheep that you'll see up on the mountain cliffs. Have fun! I'm jealous.


----------



## Diverman (Jan 3, 2013)

Thanks for the replies already! I guess I'll look at the 10-22 more seriously now.


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 3, 2013)

I think you definitely need something wide. Don't let the FF monkey on your back keep you from buying the lens you need. 10-20 is a great lens, and some of the 3rd party lenses are great as well. 

If your going to rent, and the $$ don't scare you too much, rent a 16-35mm and a 6D, or 5D II / III. Then you'd have 2 bodies, the ability to go really wide and some FF pics when you get home.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jan 3, 2013)

I loved my 10-22mm, its everything I'd ask from an UWA lens.


----------



## robbymack (Jan 3, 2013)

Montana may be my favorite place to visit. Been several times now as a old college buddy is border patrol out of whitefish. Be sure to drive out to polebridge for pizza, seriously its worth it. Plus the drive is spectacular and once you get there you realize having beer and pizza in the middle of nowhere is pretty special. As others have suggested the 10-22 is a no brainer on crop. Rent that plus one of the extenders and you should be set.


----------



## Standard (Jan 3, 2013)

I'd highly recommend the Samyang 14mm, which currently cost only $379 at B&H (It's even cheaper if you buy the Rokinon, Bower, or Pro-Optic brand instead). It's a manual lens but is fairly easy to use with Live View. There's distortion but is easily fixed in post (All ultra-wide angles will have distortion). There's been a few threads on the forum that would give you better idea and examples. I'd also recommend bringing a sturdy tripod if you're doing lots of landscape.


----------



## erda (Jan 3, 2013)

In my travels this past summer (Glacier, Yellowstone, Colorado), the lens most used was a Tokina 11-16. I'd highly recommend an ultra-wide angle to complement your existing 'quiver'.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 3, 2013)

+1 on the 10-22mm - an excellent UWA for APS-C. You might also consider the Sigma 8-16mm.



scrappydog said:


> As for the extender, I highly recommend the 1.4x III. It works well with the 70-200 f/2.8 II with wildlife and will be effectively *420mm* at f/4 with fast AF. I cannot comment on the 2x because I don't have one.



280mm f/4, you mean. We may all wish the 70-200/2.8 was a 300/2.8, but it's not. 

The 2xIII does very well with the 70-200 II (performs just about as well as the 100-400mm), and I'd recommend that for wildlife you may encounter, 140-400mm is a useful range for those subjects.


----------



## SteveCSmith (Jan 3, 2013)

If you want wildlife, you'll want more reach for sure. I had a 300mm when I visited GNP and found it lacking.

I was still a Rebel with an 18-55 at the time and don't remember wanting wider, but was in the early years of my photography interest. I was blown away when I got the Sigma 17-70 OS F2.8-4 - not familiar with the 18-135 to comment on sharpness/color/contrast. I loved the 10-22 for the 6 months I owned it (till I bought a 5d3 and switched to a 17-40).

Most important piece of equipment I wish I had back then - a polarizing filter. Its a must there to green up the greens on cloudy days and take out the water reflections.

Favorite visit place - east side (west side is too commercialized). Many Glacier was the best area and favorite campground.


----------



## distant.star (Jan 3, 2013)

FatDaddyJones said:


> First of all, there is nothing that will capture the grandeur of the landscape like being there, so don't forget to put your camera down every once in a while and just enjoy being there through the lenses of your own eyes.



Outstanding advice -- for any traveler/tourist. We photographers are sometimes so busy seeing things through a lens that we forget the direct line from our eyes to our brains!!


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 3, 2013)

I have a 10-20 and use it a fair bit, but I also like to use image stitching. I find that there is quite a bit of distortion with any UWA lens... sometimes it makes a neat effect, sometimes not... With image stitching I can push past the boundaries of a single shot and get 180 degree or wider pictures that still look reasonable. You can go crazy and create gigapixel images out of hundreds of images, or you can just put two together side by side

The software I have been using is Autopano Giga, http://www.kolor.com/image-stitching-software-autopano-giga.html, and the demo version is just like the real version, only it watermarks the images. There are lots of others out there as well. After all, we are using digital cameras, so don't let yourself be bound by trying to use it like a film camera.


----------



## DigitalDivide (Jan 3, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> scrappydog said:
> 
> 
> > As for the extender, I highly recommend the 1.4x III. It works well with the 70-200 f/2.8 II with wildlife and will be effectively *420mm* at f/4 with fast AF. I cannot comment on the 2x because I don't have one.
> ...



Perhaps he was thinking of the equivalent FF focal length on the OP's T4i? Though that would come out to be 448mm (200 x 1.4 x 1.6). A pretty decent reach for the investment anyway.


----------



## Diverman (Jan 3, 2013)

Thank you all very much! Right now I think I'm going to purchase the 10-22 and possibly rent an extender. Again, thank you for all the input so far - it is greatly appreciated!


----------



## Halfrack (Jan 3, 2013)

The 10-22 is a given, just do it either way, purchase or rent. Also don't forget the tripod and remote trigger - carbon fiber if you're going to carry it a long ways.

If you purchase a tele convertor, make it the 1.4x III, but if you rent, no reason not to play with them both.


----------



## alan_k (Jan 3, 2013)

I've only been there early season when the high passes were still closed, but it's a beautiful place. If you want some wildlife shots and won't be going through Yellowstone, you might check out the National Bison Reserve which is a couple hours south of Glacier. It's got an auto-route with excellent photo opportunities for Bison and Pronghorn, and the valley it's in has some good opportunities for waterfowl photos.

I'd suggest the 2x converter if you're only bringing one- unless you get lucky you'll want as much reach as you can get, and from what I've heard the 70-200 /2.8mkii does quite well with the 2x.

I'd also put a plug in for the Sigma 8-16 if there's any chance you'd consider an aps-c lens and don't use ND filters a lot.


----------



## michi (Jan 4, 2013)

Definitely the 10-22. Fantastic lens on crop. I have one for my 7D and the 16-35 L II for the 5DII. Really, there isn't much of a difference. Resale value for used lenses is great, you will have no problem selling that lens if you decide to go full frame one day. Enjoy your trip!


----------



## bholliman (Jan 4, 2013)

Glacier is my favorite NP, and we have been to most of them. Awesome scenery and wildlife everywhere. There are many, many great trails and places there. The Many Glacier area is our favorite and we enjoy staying at the lodge there and exploring the many trails in the surrounding area.

+1 on the 10-22mm lens. I rented a 10-22 for our last trip to Glacier in 2011 to go with a 18-135mm and 55-250mm on a T2i camera and got some spectacular shots. The 18mm wasn't wide enough for many of the shots I wanted, so I ended up using the 10-22 for most landscape shots and the 55-250 for wildlife. I found the 250mm on a crop to be enough reach for most wildlife shots, but occasionally wished I had a longer lens or extender. I would recommend renting a 2x just in case.

Enjoy your trip! Just recalling Glacier makes me want to start planning another trip back.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jan 5, 2013)

Diverman said:


> Hello all,
> 
> I will be going to Glacier National Park In late July. I am planning on taking quite a few pictures, as I love traveling to the National Parks.



Then you'll love Glacier. It's the best national park I've ever laid eyes upon for a variety of reasons.





> First, should I look into purchasing (or perhaps renting) a specific wide angle? I hope I can upgrade to FF sometime, but this likely won't be until about 5 years down the road. The two options I was considering here are the 16-35 II and the 10-22.



There are a couple things you have to consider. First, 18-135 is a tremendous range for Glacier. But I'm not such a fan of that lens. Too much compromise. 

Glacier is all about the water. Lakes, rivers, and waterfalls are everywhere. You're going to be doing compressed landscapes, making 18-135 a fantastic range. The ultra wide angle is what you'll need when you are *in *the forests, or hiking in narrow canyons. It won't get used otherwise, and if it does, the results will merely "shrink the mountains" (don't be that guy, lol).

Glacier is blessed not only with incredible wildlife watching, but a wide variety of scenery. It's also divided by two distinct sides: the wetter, greener west side with the big rivers, and the windy, jagged east side with its more impressive peaks. Both sides are brimming with stunning lakes. The wind on the east side will punish you. A tripod is a must.

Your 70-200 will work for lots of wildlife (especially the little guys in the campgrounds), but I would consider maneuvering away from the 18-135 IS. Here's what I would propose you go to Glacier with:

Scenario A: 70-200, Sigma 10-20, Canon 50 1.8 II.

The Sigma 10-20 is $400 new, and just as good as the Canon, and better in build quality and warranty. The image quality form the 50 1.8 and Sigma is better than the 18-135.

Scenario B:

70-200, Canon 15-85 IS.

This will get you decently wide and up the quality from your 18-135.

Scenario C:

70-200, 18-135 IS, Sigma 10-20.





> Secondly, should I add an extender for wildlife?



Depends on how focused on wildlife you are. If you're up around 50%, yes.




> Lastly, are there any locations that are a must? And is there any other specific gear that I "must" bring to have a successful trip?



Put a CP on your ultra wide and your standard lens. With so much water, you don't want glare. 

Every location in Glacier is spectacular, which is why it towers above most other parks that have "best spots". That said, you'll have a better chance of spotting bears and other wildlife along Going to the Sun Road, and the eastern half of the park due to the more open nature. The west side has taller, denser forest and more green. The woods around Apgar remind me of the Northwoods in a way (the spots that aren't hacked down, anyway).

I spent several weeks camping in Glacier in the fall of 2012 (which felt more like winter). I left the day they closed Two Medicine and Many Glacier for winter. I remember being cold and cooking in snow, lol. But man I saw many great things. I'll be going back in 2013, as always.


--------------

http://michaelhodgesfiction.com/


----------



## Diverman (Jan 5, 2013)

Again, I can't thank you enough for all your help!

I went to my local camera store today and tried out the 10-22. 10mm is quite a difference from 18! I then tried to see if they could come anywhere near B&H prices (so I could support a local place), but they wouldn't even budge a few dollars and they certainly wouldn't match the current price.

Needless to say, I went home and purchased the 10-22 for my trip. Thank you all for your wonderful advice, and for reassuring me with what I was leaning towards in the first place.

Sorry I didn't acknowledge everyone earlier. 

rlaverty - thanks! I'm really looking forward to the trip.

Fat Daddy - I am definitely going to make sure the Going to the Sun Road is included on our trip. I've heard quite a bit about it.

Texphoto - It's a great idea and as much as I'd like to, I think renting another body would be a little too expensive for my taste for just one location on our trip.

Robby - I do plan on renting the extender, so thanks. I'll have to look at Polebridge.

RLP - thanks for your input on the lens
Standard - unfortunately, I am not a huge fan of the manual focus only sticker on that lens (at least not at this point... so Zeiss lenses are out too I guess... 

Scrappy - I liked the 1.4 extender, as I also tried both of the extenders at the photo store. I really didn't notice much AF slow down or accuracy issues at all with either extender, so that was super nice!

Neuro - thanks. As a side note I appreciate your more technical posts, as I am an engineering student myself (I believe I remember you are some type of engineer, but I digress)

Steve - yeah that's kind of what I was thinking and seeing via flickr.

Distant - I completely agree! I've missed several pretty stellar shots because I sometimes just have to put my camera down and soak it all in.

Halfrack - I'll definitely consider renting both converters, and I'll definitely bring my trusty tripod and trigger

Alan - I looked into that after your post, and I must say it looks pretty interesting. Thanks!

Michi - That kind of surprises me, but that's awesome! Thanks for your input as well.

bholliman - I am really looking forward to the trip! Sorry to make you jealous, but hopefully you'll get to make it back soon!

Michael - I will definitely bring a CP with me, as well as a ND. Thanks for your advice on locations as well.

Thanks again!


----------



## FatDaddyJones (Jan 5, 2013)

Diverman said:


> I will definitely bring a CP with me, as well as a ND.



A neutral density filter is what I forgot the last time I went to a national park... Yellowstone, in my case. NDs are a must for taking proper exposures of all the awesome waterfalls and rapids, if you want that soft, velvety water look. At glacier, you'll use it a LOT.


----------



## FatDaddyJones (Jan 5, 2013)

When you get back, post some of your shots!


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jan 6, 2013)

FatDaddyJones said:


> Diverman said:
> 
> 
> > I will definitely bring a CP with me, as well as a ND.
> ...



Good point, but I kind of stopped using mine. A CP and careful settings seems to do just fine most of the time. Definitely not a bad idea to have one, though. Glacier is, IMHO, a water park at its heart.


-----------

http://michaelhodgesfiction.com/


----------

