# [Solved] Lenses for a 3-5 day hike



## Julie G. (May 20, 2015)

Hi,

I am planing on taking a trip to Jotunheimen, Norway in August, might be going alone too, and I am considering what gear to bring/buy. 

I have:
Canon 5D Mark III with a Black Rapid Strap
Sigma 35mm Art
Canon 70-200 F4L IS
NiftyFifty
Extra memory card and battery (1 extra?) + a tripod

Anyone have any experience with using the Sigma 35mm Art for mountain landscapes? I love the lens, but is it wide enough? I'm entertaining the idea of getting a wider lens (wide angle or fisheye), not too expensive though. I might get a CP filter too. Any other things that's worth considering?

Julie


----------



## msm (May 20, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Have been 3 times in Jotunheimen after I got interested in photography, first was with 40mm + 70-200mm, second and third with 24-70 mm + 70-200mm. All three times I would at times wish for something wider.

I think the new 16-35mm F4 IS will be nice there, pretty sure I will bring mine if I go back this year. You can of course do well with the 35mm if you stitch some panoramas when you want a wider view.


----------



## Julie G. (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



msm said:


> Have been 3 times in Jotunheimen after I got interested in photography, first was with 40mm + 70-200mm, second and third with 24-70 mm + 70-200mm. All three times I would at times wish for something wider.
> 
> I think the new 16-35mm F4 IS will be nice there, pretty sure I will bring mine if I go back this year. You can of course do well with the 35mm if you stitch some panoramas when you want a wider view.



Thanks for the reply. I might go for the 17-40 instead to save some money, but I am wondering if a fisheye could be cool instead (?). I'm not good with wide angle lenses, I find it hard to compose with it, but I am afraid that I might miss one on that kind of trips.


----------



## Deleted member 20471 (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Claes Grundsten, http://claesgrundsten.se, a famous Swedish photographer that is specialize in depicting the Lapland mountains. Is often using tele lenses for photographing mountains. You can check the EXIF information on some of his pictures at http://claesgrundsten.se/bilder/mountains.

I use the same, due to that if you use wide angel lenses, the mountain will appear “small” on the picture. But of course, some view need wide angel lens


----------



## Julie G. (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



nicke said:


> Claes Grundsten, http://claesgrundsten.se, a famous Swedish photographer that is specialize in depicting the Lapland mountains. Is often using tele lenses for photographing mountains. You can check the EXIF information on some of his pictures at http://claesgrundsten.se/bilder/mountains.
> 
> I use the same, due to that if you use wide angel lenses, the mountain will appear “small” on the picture. But of course, some view need wide angel lens



Good idea! I've have sold and bought a lot of equipment the last few years, but for a long period the only lens I used was the 85L. I'm hoping that Sigma might design a 85mm F1.4 Art  

I've never liked wide angles, mostly because I suck at composing with them for the reasons you've stated. Maybe using the lenses I already have will be enough, and using a tripod to take panoramas instead of just using a wide angle?


----------



## bholliman (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Have you looked into renting a UWA prime or zoom for the trip? If you are not sure you will like the focal length this allows you to try it out for an extended period without a purchase commitment. My recommendation would be the EF 16-35/4 IS, a terrific lens optically and the IS allows hand holding at fairly slow shutter speeds if a tripod isn't handy.

I'm still learning UWA composition and trying to develop a better "eye" for it. I've been trying to read as much as I can about it from the experts and learning from trial and error.


----------



## Maximilian59 (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

I am doing landscape photography in the Alpes and the surroundings.
Definitely take a 16-35/4 with you. It will give you all you want for starting with UWA. The only drawback for you is the filter thread of 77 mm. You will need an adapter ring for your tele zoom.
Never go out photgraphing landscapes without a polarizing filter. If you can afford by one for both lenses.
Buy the best tripod and head you can afford or ask a friend to lend. Look at other threads for more information on tripods in the forum. As I don't know how you are traffeling, consider how large or small your tripod will be. Especially transportation in aircrafts can be a problem, if you want to have it in hand luggage. 
Extra memory card and at least extra battery are a must. 
If you don't have the possibilty to save your work at least every day on a drive, use the second card slot in the body for backup and leave one in your hotel.
Get a set of ND filters for long time exposure in day light. Don't go cheapo here also. Good lenses with bad filters distroys all. I often see very expensive cameras and lenses and a cheap filter mounted. You spent a few thousend dollars or Euros and safe know money on the little things?
If you want to go serious in landscape photography, think of graded filters (100x150 mm). But here it will get expensive. Unfortunately only the high priced ones as Lee and Singh-Ray are normaly without color cast. For the cheaper ones you need good luck to get a real neutral one. If you have the possibility compare in the shop. Using this filters needs some expierence, so don't buy on the last day.
For photographing: Avoid exposure to the right if ever possible. Go -1EV. Do some tests now and compare afterwords in lightroom or whatever you use. Bringing the bright sky down is in the most times worse than bringing shadows up and reducing noise. Get familiar with the built in HDR of your camera. It gives you a more or les good jpeg, but the trhee raws are still on your card. It is quicker than in usage as the bracketing function. Put it on your personel menu.
For your trip: Good weather and good light.
Maximilian


----------



## Don Haines (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



Julie G. said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am planing on taking a trip to Jotunheimen, Norway in August, might be going alone too, and I am considering what gear to bring/buy.
> 
> ...


Yes for the CP filter.... 
Don't forget a spare battery and memory card(s).....

Yes for the 70-200F4IS. From a hiker's perspective, that may well be the finest lens that Canon ever made. The combination of IQ, weight, and price is untouchable. It also plays very well with the 1.4 teleconverter and becomes a nice combo for more distant objects and wildlife...

For a wide lens, have you considered the 24F2.8? The quality is surprisingly good for the price, and from the hiker's perspective, it is small and light..... and if you need to go wider, you can always take multiple shots and stitch them together afterwards....

Also, my hiking pole has a screw-off knob on the top and becomes a monopod.... very useful!


----------



## Sporgon (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



Julie G. said:


> I've never liked wide angles, mostly because I suck at composing with them for the reasons you've stated. Maybe using the lenses I already have will be enough, and using a tripod to take panoramas instead of just using a wide angle?



You don't need a tripod to take panoramas, in fact you can argue it's quite the opposite: you need a tripod for wide angle, single frame shots. The reason for this is that when using a wide angle on a small format camera for landscape much of the detail is far away and your wide angle focal length is making it smaller still, so the most microscopic movement reduces resolution. Of course this is even worse on a crop camera. 

With a panoramic you are using a longer focal length lens in portrait to get the equivalent vertical framing, so you have more magnification, and you're joining more frames horizontally so you're making a larger format that needs less enlargement, which is less enlargement of errors. 



Don Haines said:


> Yes for the CP filter....



I should mention polarising filters are a disaster on Panoramics. About the only disadvantage of doing them.



Maximilian59 said:


> For photographing: Avoid exposure to the right if ever possible. Go -1EV. Do some tests now and compare afterwords in lightroom or whatever you use. Bringing the bright sky down is in the most times worse than bringing shadows up and reducing noise. Get familiar with the built in HDR of your camera. It gives you a more or les good jpeg, but the trhee raws are still on your card. It is quicker than in usage as the bracketing function. Put it on your personel menu.
> For your trip: Good weather and good light.
> Maximilian


At long last ! Someone else who recognises that 'ETTR' can be downright damaging.


----------



## Julie G. (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



Maximilian59 said:


> Never go out photgraphing landscapes without a polarizing filter. If you can afford by one for both lenses.
> Buy the best tripod and head you can afford or ask a friend to lend. Look at other threads for more information on tripods in the forum. As I don't know how you are traffeling, consider how large or small your tripod will be. Especially transportation in aircrafts can be a problem, if you want to have it in hand luggage.


I'm from Norway, and living there, so I'll be traveling by buss to Jotunheimen (Gjende or Bygdin) then hiking from there (3-5 days) and tenting. I can't be lugging along too heavy equipment, but the size doesn't matter as long as it's not heavy. I might be able to save up 500 usd for a tripod (which means excluding buying a UWA lens). I've been considering Sirui...



Maximilian59 said:


> Get a set of ND filters for long time exposure in day light. Don't go cheapo here also. Good lenses with bad filters distroys all. I often see very expensive cameras and lenses and a cheap filter mounted. You spent a few thousend dollars or Euros and safe know money on the little things?
> If you want to go serious in landscape photography, think of graded filters (100x150 mm). But here it will get expensive. Unfortunately only the high priced ones as Lee and Singh-Ray are normaly without color cast. For the cheaper ones you need good luck to get a real neutral one. If you have the possibility compare in the shop. Using this filters needs some expierence, so don't buy on the last day.


Can't remember if I still have it or not, but I think I have a Cokin Z-Pro Filter adapter and a HiTech ND Grad 4x4 filter. I'm thinking of buying B+W C-Pol MCR filter for the largest filter thread, and adapters to the rest?



Maximilian59 said:


> For photographing: Avoid exposure to the right if ever possible. Go -1EV. Do some tests now and compare afterwords in lightroom or whatever you use. Bringing the bright sky down is in the most times worse than bringing shadows up and reducing noise. Get familiar with the built in HDR of your camera. It gives you a more or les good jpeg, but the trhee raws are still on your card. It is quicker than in usage as the bracketing function. Put it on your personel menu.
> For your trip: Good weather and good light.
> Maximilian


This is what I usually do: underexpose then lighten the shadows in lightroom.


----------



## Julie G. (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



Sporgon said:


> Julie G. said:
> 
> 
> > I've never liked wide angles, mostly because I suck at composing with them for the reasons you've stated. Maybe using the lenses I already have will be enough, and using a tripod to take panoramas instead of just using a wide angle?
> ...



Ah, thanks! I didn't know that


----------



## Eagle Eye (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

I think the *EF 17-40mm* would be a great addition, particularly if you can find one used. Some thoughts on the 16-35 f/4 IS: if you're shooting on a tripod, you don't need IS. If you're handholding at 16mm, you can get away with 1/15s shutter speeds without IS. With the IS on, you maybe get an extra stop, stop and a half, shooting at 1/5s. Any exposure longer than that, the IS is noticable but doesn't save the photo. Canon states in its materials that there's a 4-stop advantage at 35mm but makes no note of the stop advantage at wider angles. Personally IS is not helpful to me for landscapes because I almost always am using graduated neutral density filters and I have to be on a tripod for that. A few 16-35mm advantages: the image quality is slightly better than the 17-40 and the 16-35 is more tolerant of filter stacking. For a trip like the one you're taking, I'd prefer less weight and broader focal length with the 17-40. Add the nifty fifty (maybe upgrade to the new one for the additional aperture blades and better build?) and the 70-200 and you're covered. My current lens lineup which I've been using for about a year is a 16-35mm f/4L IS, a 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS, and a Zeiss 50mm f/2 Makro. Prior to that, I spent six years shooting with a 17-40, a 70-200mm f/4L IS, and a 50mm f/1.4, pretty much what you'd be carrying.


----------



## NancyP (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

I haven't used it, but I certainly echo the 16-35 f/4 recommendation, because that covers all the wide angle FLs you are likely to use. One thing to consider is that if you do panoramas involving the sea, you may want to use longer exposure (1 sec or more) to blur the waves, so the program doesn't get confused trying to merge stop-motion non-matching waves . At least it works better to do this on rivers - I am 1,000 miles from salt water. 
If I were doing this trip and not trying for astrophotography, I would go for:
16-35 f/4
Nifty 50 or possibly a substitute (I have an old 55mm f/3.5 AIS manual Nikkor plus adapter that is good for macro and landscape and weighs 200 grams more than the Nifty Fifty)
70-200 f/4 IS
maybe 1.4x TC II, if expecting to shoot larger wildlife (useless for songbirds)
Polarizing filter, largest size needed, plus step down rings
"Big stopper", and possibly 3 stop graduated ND and holder, if you use them
In warm weather, 2 fully charged batteries - and no serious chimping! Cold weather, more batteries.
3 or more 16 G cards
Hiking tripod with ball head (1.4 kg total)
L bracket


----------



## Maximilian59 (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

One thing I forgot: Buy a tripod mount ring for your zoom. You don't need the original Canon. It's too expensive. I have the 70-200/2.8 which has this ring and I am glad to have it. Can anybody here give advice which 3rd party ring is good?
For the tripod take ohne with two time expansions of the legs. For the maximum height with center column down, You don't Need more than up just under your chinn or even less depending on your ballhead. This can save you some money and weight.


----------



## Julie G. (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Just to sum up:

[list type=decimal]
[*]Tripod: Any suggestion below 500 usd?
[*]Lens: Upon reviewing by budget I know I can't afford the 16-35, but a used 17-40 might do.
[*]Filter: CP + adapter.
[*]Tripod mount for the 70-200 if cheap
[*]Total of 3 batteries and 3 16 GB memory cards
[*]I'm shooting landscapes (mountains, nature), night and day. No wildlife or ocean.
[/list]

I'm not sure what my budget will look like yet, but I know I have a lot of hiking gear to buy so the end budget will depend on whether or not I'm able to buy used or on sale. I might not be able to buy a lens and a tripod, but I'm still looking in case I might. Extra stuff like TC, ND, Big stopper won't be bought.


----------



## lilmsmaggie (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Consider renting the 16-35 f4. Amazing lens. I rented one from LensRentals and used it last month in Yosemite.

Also, ND filters if you can swing it. Screw-on will be cheaper. I've read good things about Haida ND's:

http://www.achim-sieger.de/en/nd-filter-review-lee-big-stopper-formatt-hitech-prostop-irnd-haida

Generally speaking, the difference in exposure (foreground vs sky) will be around 2 stops.

If you think you might consider the LEE Big Stopper, be advised to set your WB to 10,000K in camera. 
The LEE Big Stopper has a blue color cast, so setting WB to 10,000K will neutralize the color cast.

LEE's Little Stopper (6 stop ND) is neutral. start with a WB of 5500K. The only reason I know about the WB settings for the LEE filters is because I spent the weekend in Yosemite with Jeremy Walker and reps from LEE.
It was LEE Filter's first workshop in the US (4-24 thru 4/26) it snowed -- then rained. The last day Sunday, was clear and sunny. 

Speaking of rain -- you might consider having a couple of these in your bag just in case:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/469774-REG/OP_TECH_USA_9001132_18_Rainsleeve_Set_of.html


Backing up to a WA, since you will be in the mountains, you will want to take advantage of the night sky.

Have fun!

BTW -- I took along 3, 16 GB cards and 2 batteries for my 6D. 




Julie G. said:


> Just to sum up:
> 
> [list type=decimal]
> [*]Tripod: Any suggestion below 500 usd?
> ...


----------



## slcparche (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Try a 35 f/2 IS, a 100 f/2/100 f/2.8 macro and a 70-200 f/4L is. The 67mm filters will fit the 35 f/2 and the 70-200. The 100 f/2 or the 100 f/2.8 macro are both lightand take 58mm filters.


----------



## adhocphotographer (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

I would go with the 17-40L (F/5.6 onwards and it is fantastic) with the 70-200L. You can throw in the nifty 50 if you want, but I think the first two lenses should cover most things! 

CP filter, and maybe some GND filters too if that is your thing. Skip a tripod, but if you have a gorilla pod or the likes, would be good! 

Have fun, enjoy!


----------



## lilmsmaggie (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Something else to consider:

Do monitor weather reports and conditions between now and your trip. Weather in mountain regions have a tendency to change rapidly and it is not uncommon to snow even in summer months. My Yosemite trip is a testament to that. It wasn't supposed to rain let alone snow the weekend I was there. Be prepared for the unexpected.

CP filter ++1 -- you will need it. GND's unless you already have a filter holder system, hand holding them in front of the lens may not work for you. Screw on GND's: you can't control the transition. 

Best to go with solid ND's instead. If you go with screw-on ND's, you can stack say a 3 stop and 6 stop together.
You might consider a variable or fader ND but with WA lenses, you'll get an 'X' pattern on the image.


As for a tripod -- You'll have to decide whether its worth taking. Long exposure with or without ND's will require a tripod. Maybe something like the MeFoto or Manfrotto BeFree or maybe a monopod --- don't forget you can rent a tripod like the Induro Carbon 8X CT214 Tripod for about $38 for 6 days at LensRentals or a INDURO Carbon 8X CT113 for $32 for 7 days at BorrowLenses. Renting a lens and/or tripod or both may be very doable, so check out your options.


----------



## mnclayshooter (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



Julie G. said:


> Extra memory card and battery (1 extra?) + a tripod



I'd bring at least one more memory card, depending on the size and your shooting style... Can't hurt - they're small and relatively cheap compared to airfare to get to that destination again in the event that one card isn't enough for the shots you'll take and the potential to lose/damage one somehow... pretty unlikely, but hey, they're small right? I filled 3 32GB cards in the Rocky Mountains last year from landscapes to elk to ground squirrels... Maybe you're more restrained. I can't help it... I like taking photos. 



Julie G. said:


> I'm entertaining the idea of getting a wider lens (wide angle or fisheye), not too expensive though. I might get a CP filter too. Any other things that's worth considering?



I have a 17-40, and have used it pretty successfully at mountain/gorge/valley scenes. I also have a 14mm... while it takes in a wider view, it makes horizons seem microscopic. In other words, capturing the depth/breadth of mountains will appear diminished with the fisheye/ultra-wide effect. Just my opinion though, others may see it otherwise, or you may want that effect of spaciousness.


----------



## Lloyd (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Julie

I completed a 4 day 3 night backpacking trip to the Grand Gulch in Utah about a month ago and I would take weight minimization seriously. On my trip, photography was secondary to weight and sticking with the group, so I brought my wife’s SL1 and a Canon 10-22mm for wide angle shots. (The advice on not exposing to the right would have helped many of my shots so this is good advice, if a bit late for me) If photography was more important on this trip, I would have taken the 5Diii and either the 16-35mm f/4l or made panos with the shorty forty. If lowering your pack weight is a major consideration, you may want to follow Sporgon’s other posts on the use of the 40mm for panos and look at his website to see the great results he has achieved. 

For rain, you might want to consider having a low weight inexpensive silnylon waterproof dry bag in your pack to put your gear in if it rains or if you find yourself having to cross a stream with a potential that you could go for a swim.

If you have the BlackRapid system you might want to consider a backpack strap which allows you to attach camera straps to your backpack straps. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1081010-REG/blackrapid_ras1c_1a0_backpack_strap.html I used the Op/tech system as I am a cheap bastard http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/485766-REG/OP_TECH_USA_1301652_System_Connectors_Reporter_Backpack_Set_of.html

The backpack strap worked well for me, but you might want to make sure that it does not drive you nuts as the camera can bounce around depending on your gait and the terrain. (they make other straps to minimize this, but I have never used them) I know that others may view lens cap retention or keeper strings as the true sign of a novice, but when backpacking they really come in handy for me especially when using the backpack straps. I finally bought them after losing two caps on one other backpacking trip.

Have a great trip.

Lloyd


----------



## msm (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Regarding wide angles and mountains. Yes they can make the mountain seem small if you use it from a distance. Personally I prefer wide angles when I am close to the mountain, on the mountain or in narrow valleys.

When used on the mountains or on narrow ridges, then in my opinion they can make the mountain look more spectacular than less wide lenses where you only get a small part of the view. Here is an example taken at 16mm with the 16-35 from Romsdalseggen, a popular ridge walk in Norway.


----------



## bedford (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



Sporgon said:


> Maximilian59 said:
> 
> 
> > For photographing: Avoid exposure to the right if ever possible. Go -1EV. Do some tests now and compare afterwords in lightroom or whatever you use. Bringing the bright sky down is in the most times worse than bringing shadows up and reducing noise. Get familiar with the built in HDR of your camera. It gives you a more or les good jpeg, but the trhee raws are still on your card. It is quicker than in usage as the bracketing function. Put it on your personel menu.
> ...



I don't fully understand how ETTR - when done properly - could be a bad thing.

As I understand ETTR it means pushing the histogram to the right as far as possible _without_ clipping the highlights (even specular ones). That said it should be clear that simply looking at the histogram could be misleading.

Oliver


----------



## mnclayshooter (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



msm said:


> Regarding wide angles and mountains. Yes they can make the mountain seem small if you use it from a distance. Personally I prefer wide angles when I am close to the mountain, on the mountain or in narrow valleys.
> 
> When used on the mountains or on narrow ridges, then in my opinion they can make the mountain look more spectacular than less wide lenses where you only get a small part of the view. Here is an example taken at 16mm with the 16-35 from Romsdalseggen, a popular ridge walk in Norway.



This is definitely a case for the wide angle. Nice shot.


----------



## Sporgon (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



bedford said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Maximilian59 said:
> ...



It's to do with saturation and tone, specifically blue. I don't quite understand for sure why blue is sensitive to this. Certainly blue is the highest frequency wave length and has the most energy but I don't know if this is the reason. Overexposed blue and you won't get it back to its original tone and saturation again. This is important in landscape because the sky often has much blue in it, and is at the brighter end of the EV range to start with. 

There have been some truly dreadful articles about the 'benefits' of ETTR posted on the internet over the last ten years.


----------



## AJ (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



Julie G. said:


> Just to sum up:
> 
> [list type=decimal]
> [*]Tripod: Any suggestion below 500 usd?
> ...



1. I often backpack with a cheap drugstore tripod. They are flimsy, made of light aluminum, but it'll do. The 90% solution.
2. 17-40/4 is a nice lens. There are plenty of used ones about nowadays as people are upgrading to 16-35/4 IS. 
3. Just be careful with the CP at wide angles. It produces weird effects.
4 and 5. Sounds good to me.


----------



## brad-man (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

I use this ring on my 70-200 f/4IS and it is well made and a lot less than the OEM version:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0054ENDO2/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## espenh (May 21, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Hi,

I have been to Jotunheimen more times than i remember (I collect 2K peaks). I would definatly leave the 35mm at home, but that is my kind of photography.

Depending on what I do my minimum kit during summer (full frame):
-Canon 16-35 f/4
-A 24-70 or a 24-120 ( I use sony and Nikon not so much canon anymore)

I also sometimes carry a 70-300 zoom, but it sees little usage, but especially in Hurrungane (Fannaråkken), Dyrhaugsryggen and in the more pointy area you can get some really nice shots with a long zoom.

For filters I usually carry:
-77m polarizer 
-2 77mm ND filters
-3 GND filters


i don´t do any super long exposure so I just handhold the gnd.

My most used tripod is http://www.aliexpress.com/item/Professional-Sirui-T2205X-with-G20-Ballhead-Carbon-Tripod-5-Section-49in-Height-26-5lb-Load/748037191.html

(they ship to norway, no extra tax or vat)


Espen 
www.mintur-foto.no


----------



## jeffa4444 (May 22, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

I guess I will swim against the tide I too did a Lee Filters workshop in Wales with Jeremy Walker in Snowdonia National Park I took my 70-200mm at the time my 17-40mm and the 100mm Macro but the hero lens was the 24-105mm I shot with it 90% of the time and did some shots with the 100mm. 
You need a good carbon fibre tripod and the best head you can afford I use the Manfrotto 55xPro and the Arca Swiss Z1. I use the Lee Filter system with Landscape Polarizer, H/E ND grads, Big Stopper / Little Stopper and in fall use an 81A.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 22, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



Sporgon said:


> Julie G. said:
> 
> 
> > I've never liked wide angles, mostly because I suck at composing with them for the reasons you've stated. Maybe using the lenses I already have will be enough, and using a tripod to take panoramas instead of just using a wide angle?
> ...



I've become interested in wider angle scenes, and have only tried a few handheld panoramic shots. Even with no experience, I can see that I get better images than with a wide lens.

ETTR works fine when used under the right conditions, but I normally just try for a correct exposure. Blowing out a image is a total disaster.


----------



## Julie G. (May 22, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

I've been checking some prices on renting a 16-35 (F2.8L II) and for 5 days it will cost me 2/3 of a used 17-40, so that solves that dilemma.

I'm usually a minimalist (or far as one can be when having a 5D3) when it comes to my photography gear. 90% of the time I'm using only one lens, either it's a 35mm or a 85mm. I'm not leaving my S35 at home, but I'm probably gonna get the 17-40 too (the alternative would be a cheap 24mm).

This is a shot of Oslo from my Sigma 35 Art:







And this is one from my Canon 70-200 F4L IS:


----------



## Julie G. (May 22, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Q1: Is a 40 mm ball head good for my Canon 70-200 F4L IS? Or should it be bigger? I have no plans of getting anything heavier than the Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS II.
Q2: Any experiences with PhotoClam ball heads?
Q3: I've heard good things about RRS ball heads, but which size would be good for me? BH-30, 40 or 55?
Q4: What about Feisol Classic series for tripod legs (given that I want to do some night photography)?

EDIT: I just got an email from someone selling "Photo Clam PTC-424 tripod" + "RRS BH-55 LR ball head" for 50% off, I think I might go for that..


----------



## redelses (May 22, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



mnclayshooter said:


> Julie G. said:
> 
> 
> > Extra memory card and battery (1 extra?) + a tripod
> ...



In addition to extra memory cards, the 5D III has dual card slots. Bring a couple 32 or 64 GB SD cards (if you use CF typically), or vice versa, and save photos on both cards simultaneously. Just in case... it's nice to have a backup if one of the primary cards goes bad.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (May 22, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Simply take your 70-200/4L IS and the new 16-35/4L IS and you are done. You won't miss the 36-69mm range but in case take your nifty-fifty that it weight nothing.


----------



## Fotofanten (May 24, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*

Hey Julie G! I too enjoy hiking in the norwegian mountains. Mostly out west and up north though. 

My main consideration is weight. Lighter pack equals less physically exhaustion equals more enjoyment and more ground covered. This makes for better pictures in my opinion. I like the site http://lighterpack.com/ with regards to weight management. 

If you are going "hut to hut" then weight should be easily manageable. If you plan to carry a tent and a sleep
system as well as all that camera gear then those kilos add up quickly. If you take care then a sub 10 kilo pack (including camera gear, excluding consumables) should be possible,- light enough to be comfortable even for several days. 

My most used lens is the 16-35 f/4 IS L. I'm usually a prime lens guy but I really appreciate the flexibility of this highly usable zoom range when I'm out and about above the tree line. I use screw in filters (CPL and 10 stop ND) and bracket instead of opting for a heavier more cumbersome square filter system. It does work if you are willing to manually blend exposures back home, but I do miss adjustable graduated ND filters sometimes. 

As for carrying the camera itself, I put it in a Lowepro Toploader Zoom 50 AW bag (6D + L-plate + 16-35 f/4 fits with absolutely no room to spare) and either toss it in the backpack or clip it onto the chest harness. Black Diamond has some cheap lightweight plastic carabiners that are very useful for everything but climbing. 

As for Feisol, i tried their CB-50DC ball head for a day but their safety mechanism on the clamp was not fully compatible with my Kirk plate. I mean it was, but it did not work very smoothly. The head was nice though, and their "normal" heads should be even smoother than the 50DC. I opted for Induro instead, which has served me very well. A friend of mine has a Sirui setup which feels just as nice as my Induro setup. Feisol should be in the same ball park. I never had the pleasure of using RRS gear, as it was too hard to get a hold of. My next tripod will be without a central column, as I never use it. I had a Benro "travel angel" CF before and it was not as nice as the Induro, not even close. I hear it's the same manufacturer though, so there is that. 

Anyway - best of luck to you! I hope the weather is on your side and that you have a nice trip


----------



## bholliman (May 24, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



Julie G. said:


> I've been checking some prices on renting a 16-35 (F2.8L II) and for 5 days it will cost me 2/3 of a used 17-40, so that solves that dilemma.



If rental rate are that high, going for the 17-40 is an easy call. Its a nice lens stepped down. 

Beautiful pictures! I certainly would like to visit Norway and the rest of Scandinavia at some point.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (May 24, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



Julie G. said:


> Q1: Is a 40 mm ball head good for my Canon 70-200 F4L IS? Or should it be bigger? I have no plans of getting anything heavier than the Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS II.



Depends on the Ball Head! I have used very large (and extremely expensive) ball heads that I wouldn't use with a Canon 1 series camera and a 24-105 yet I have a silly little Triopo RS3 (+ Arca clamp) that isn't upset by my Canon 800mm F5.6 L IS and it's only a 36mm ball.
Size isn't important (where have I heard that before?) is is down to the lockup and rigidity of the head - in my experience price is no guide. 
Much as I like my RS3 head it is not for everybody (and you have to retrofit a clamp) so I would suggest you have a look at the Situi K30x and, maybe, the K20x. I have the K40x and whilst it is great it is simply overkill (and a bit heavy) for what you need.


----------



## Random Orbits (May 25, 2015)

*Re: Lenses for a 3-5 day hike*



Julie G. said:


> Q1: Is a 40 mm ball head good for my Canon 70-200 F4L IS? Or should it be bigger? I have no plans of getting anything heavier than the Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS II.
> Q2: Any experiences with PhotoClam ball heads?
> Q3: I've heard good things about RRS ball heads, but which size would be good for me? BH-30, 40 or 55?
> Q4: What about Feisol Classic series for tripod legs (given that I want to do some night photography)?
> ...



I have a RRS BH-55 on 24L legs, and it's worked fine. The BH-40 would also work well and is more often mated with the 2x series, but I got a good price on the used BH-55. I've used the combination with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II with a 2x without a problem.


----------



## danski0224 (May 25, 2015)

Julie G. said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am planing on taking a trip to Jotunheimen, Norway in August, might be going alone too, and I am considering what gear to bring/buy.
> 
> ...



Breezing through the thread-

Yes, learn how to do a handheld (or tripod based) portrait orientation panorama. You need to keep the exposure the same in the individual images and keep from refocusing the lens (back-button focus or put the lens in manual mode). The tripod will need to be leveled and you will need a panning base feature as part of the tripod or ballhead.

You can use any focal length. "Landscape" does not necessarily mean "14mm" or "16mm" or "24mm". You may find that a multi-image stitch at say ~35mm or 50mm looks more natural than a single shot at 17mm. Of course, if the scene is distant enough, handheld at 200mm+ could also work for a image stitch.

You may want more than one extra battery. Those are light enough and cheap enough. Same with cards.

I have used a Benro C2970T tripod and it would likely work fine for your listed gear. As a kit, the ballhead that it comes with is also suitable but I found that a Sirui K40 was much better.

CP filter and any required step-up rings- yes. 

An extension tube and/or something like a 500D close-up lens may be useful for closer/smaller subjects along the way.

I am beginning to find that making a custom white balance makes more than a trivial difference in photos. You may want to look into something like "Clear White" from here: http://www.digitalphotographykits.com/ or find something else that is similar or works for you.


----------

