Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: 70-200 & landscape

  1. #1
    Senior Member JohnBrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    532
    Post Thanks / Like

    70-200 & landscape

    I'm leaving this week for Utah for some shooting in a workshop with Andy Biggs and Bret Edge. I have a dilemma in that they recommend a long tele along with the usual suspects. I don't even own a tele lens, only shooting primes. I can get a 70-200 f4 rental if need be. However, for those of you who have shot in Utah and know the topography - how often would such a lens be needed?

    And secondly, there is more to the story than first appears. I'm hauling quite a load as it is and adding a heavy lens to my already heavy bag is daunting because I have a herniated disc in my lower back which may force me to ditch the bag altogether and simply carry a camera body w/lens around my neck and hand carry my tripod. I would enjoy hearing about others experiences.
    Thanks for all replies.

  2. #2
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: 70-200 & landscape

    John, I can only think you'd want it for wildlife or isolations, or maybe combined with an element to make the Moon appear larger against it. I personally would not feel under-gunned if my 85 was my longest lens, but that's me.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  3. #3
    Senior Member JohnBrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 70-200 & landscape

    Thanks for the reply, Jack. The longest lens I was planning on taking is the 85 1.4G. I also have a 105 2.5 Ai, but no real advantage there.

  4. #4
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: 70-200 & landscape

    If you wanted to save weight then take the 105, but I think you'll be happy with either choice for your long. Speaking for me only, in red rock area landscapes, I am using my 24 and 50 about 90% of the time. The other 10% is gonna be the 17 and 85. The only time I ever used my 70-200 was to zoom in on some individual petroglyphs, and then honestly they by themselves don't make that great of shot, they're far better when placed in context to the area.

    A final thought: I don't even own a 70-200 now, but *IF* I expected to need to isolate like that, I have a late version 180/2.8 AF-D, which is very good optically and cheap, and relatively compact/lightweight. I have been tempted to get a 70-200/4 VR as a travel lens specifically for isolations, but then upon reflection back to when I owned them, I know I virtually always used a 70-200 at the long end, and then only rarely when travlling. So now I figure I can make do just fine with the 180 I already own, and it's a stop faster with lesser DoF when wanted, also a great long portrait lens. Just a thought, and KEH allows returns
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #5
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: 70-200 & landscape

    Shot many times in Utah and it's pretty rare to get to a 200 but I do and use a Minolta 200 2.8. Not a big fan of the longer zooms myself but as Jack said for Nikon there old 180 2.8 is a nice lens and not near as bulky and heavy. Outside of that Nikon is a big system overall and may want to think about that down the road with your back.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #6
    Senior Member bab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    250
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: 70-200 & landscape

    Why not rent a mirror less with a 50-150, 10-24 and a 1.4 ext.
    It will introduce you to lighter weight and you may learn something.
    BAB

  7. #7
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: 70-200 & landscape

    I have used the 70-200 f/4 recently on a landscape trip, and there are a few distant compositions and isolations, but in general I haul it only when I am traveling by car.
    -bob

  8. #8
    Senior Member JohnBrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 70-200 & landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by bab View Post
    Why not rent a mirror less with a 50-150, 10-24 and a 1.4 ext.
    It will introduce you to lighter weight and you may learn something.
    BAB
    Thank you. I did buy an NEX-7 when they came out. It was ok but I have a Leica system I prefer for everything else.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •