Reducing weight?

rob-nikon

rob-nikon

Suspended / Banned
Messages
7,077
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
Next year I'm planning to combine some camping on location with landscape photography. Whilst my current landscape setup (24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8) is not too heavy for days out with the camera I know it will be too much once I add in the camping gear/food/water etc for an overnight camp. Whilst the most obvious option would be to swap the f2.8s for f4 equivalent versions (24-120 and 70-20) I'm not sure if this would enough of a weight saving (only saves 900g from 2.4kg) and I can't get my head around letting the f2.8's go when they are useful for the wildlife side, my main photography genre. Another option I've thought of is a one lens setup, maybe something like the 24-120 (maybe too short as I love the 70-200 for landscapes) or even a 28-300. I'm wondering what others do, are there any other lenses that I've not thought of considering.
 
I recently bought a tent/bag/mat for doing the same thing from next spring. I'm intending on taking my (your old) 16-35 and a 70-300. My trips are only going to be a 1.5 hour hike in on time for sunset, camp and catch the sunrise and back out and home near enough in time for work so I won't be bringing and cooking equipment, just a couple of snacks. I am on the lookout for a light travel tripod though.
 
phil_b said:
I recently bought a tent/bag/mat for doing the same thing from next spring. I'm intending on taking my (your old) 16-35 and a 70-300. My trips are only going to be a 1.5 hour hike in on time for sunset, camp and catch the sunrise and back out and home near enough in time for work so I won't be bringing and cooking equipment, just a couple of snacks. I am on the lookout for a light travel tripod though.
Click to expand...
I've already decided and purchased the sleeping bag and air mat. The tent choice is still up in the air. I'm currently looking at wild country as they seem to be quite lightweight compared to the equivalent tent designs from other manufacturers. When I say cooking equipment/food it will be a jetboil stove boil some water to make naked noodles snack and a coffee.

Lightweight tripod-I've already decided would probably be a mefoto road trip as it's 1.6kg and is arca Swiss. That would save about 1kg on my current tripod. I'm just looking for one to come up second hand as I'm not sure how much use it would get otherwise.
 
I bought a Vango Banshee as I am only going to be on my own. My tripod is a manfrotto 055 with a 410 geared head so definitely need something lighter.
 
phil_b said:
I bought a Vango Banshee as I am only going to be on my own. My tripod is a manfrotto 055 with a 410 geared head so definitely need something lighter.
Click to expand...
I've looked at the Banshee (and tried lying in one in the middle of go outdoors!), I think it's possible the banshee will likely be my backup option if I don't make a decision on another tent. They seem to be the go to tent on the wild camping groups I've joined. It's just that I've got a little weight conscious and now I'm trying to save just that little bit more (hence looking at lens options). Currently it's the wild country zephyros 2 that's leading weight/price wise at 1.8kg, maybe the wild country helm at 1.3kg if I decide I really need that little bit more head room (though it's probably unlikely if I'm going to be out in the rain). Im waiting until Black Friday to see if anything comes up in the sales.
 
rob-nikon said:
Next year I'm planning to combine some camping on location with landscape photography. Whilst my current landscape setup (24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8) is not too heavy for days out with the camera I know it will be too much once I add in the camping gear/food/water etc for an overnight camp. Whilst the most obvious option would be to swap the f2.8s for f4 equivalent versions (24-120 and 70-20) I'm not sure if this would enough of a weight saving (only saves 900g from 2.4kg) and I can't get my head around letting the f2.8's go when they are useful for the wildlife side, my main photography genre. Another option I've thought of is a one lens setup, maybe something like the 24-120 (maybe too short as I love the 70-200 for landscapes) or even a 28-300. I'm wondering what others do, are there any other lenses that I've not thought of considering.
Click to expand...

I have a friend who is a professional photographer, he uses a Nikon 28-300 and a Nikon 16-35. Obviously they aren't going to get you f2.8 but it's always going to be a compromise when you are focusing on weight.
 
Andrew Benbow said:
I have a friend who is a professional photographer, he uses a Nikon 28-300 and a Nikon 16-35. Obviously they aren't going to get you f2.8 but it's always going to be a compromise when you are focusing on weight.
Click to expand...

I use the same combination and the AFS 28-300 mm VR Nikon is a cracking performer for a all in one lens.(y)
 
Andrew Benbow said:
I have a friend who is a professional photographer, he uses a Nikon 28-300 and a Nikon 16-35. Obviously they aren't going to get you f2.8 but it's always going to be a compromise when you are focusing on weight.
Click to expand...

I would certainly consider the Nikon AFS-VR 28-300mm I'm really impressed with mine takes 77mm if you use them so same as you existing 2.8s.
Here is a link to a few on my old Flickr account

http://www.flickr.com/photos/phiggys/albums/72157632273768459
 
I went camping a couple of years back and I took two compacts with me, could not face taking a DSLR and lenses. After packing in the tent sleeping bags table and chairs, oh and all the food and water not much room for anything else. I think one of us even managed to get a mini fridge loaded up.
 
Phiggys said:
I use the same combination and the AFS 28-300 mm VR Nikon is a cracking performer for a all in one lens.(y)
Click to expand...

Yeah, very jealous, there isn't an equivalent from Canon, the Tamron 28-300 is fine for walking around but it's no where near as sharp as the Nikon.
 
Andrew Benbow said:
I have a friend who is a professional photographer, he uses a Nikon 28-300 and a Nikon 16-35. Obviously they aren't going to get you f2.8 but it's always going to be a compromise when you are focusing on weight.
Click to expand...
Sounds good, f2.8 isn't really needed for landscape. I'm mainly between f8-f11. Ive found I don't shoot wider than 24mm often (hence selling the 16-35 to @phil_b) so I would be losing 4mm but that much of an often when weight is the major concern.

Phiggys said:
I use the same combination and the AFS 28-300 mm VR Nikon is a cracking performer for a all in one lens.(y)
Click to expand...
Phiggys said:
I would certainly consider the Nikon AFS-VR 28-300mm I'm really impressed with mine takes 77mm if you use them so same as you existing 2.8s.
Here is a link to a few on my old Flickr account

http://www.flickr.com/photos/phiggys/albums/72157632273768459
Click to expand...
Thanks I've had at look at your flickr and good to see examples, especially with a d810 that would be using with it.

jonbeeza said:
I went camping a couple of years back and I took two compacts with me, could not face taking a DSLR and lenses. After packing in the tent sleeping bags table and chairs, oh and all the food and water not much room for anything else. I think one of us even managed to get a mini fridge loaded up.
Click to expand...
I'm hoping not to take that much, there will be no tables, chairs or fridges. The plan is for spring/summer trips so there won't be much time to fill between sunset and sunrise.


Andrew Benbow said:
Yeah, very jealous, there isn't an equivalent from Canon, the Tamron 28-300 is fine for walking around but it's no where near as sharp as the Nikon.
Click to expand...
I thought there was a canon 28-300 just that it was quite an expensive £2K L lens.
 
Andrew Benbow said:
Unfortunately it's also heavier than a 70-200 f2.8 so I don't think you can really compare it with the Nikon 28-300 :(
Click to expand...
I hadn't noticed it was so much heavier (double the weight of the Nikon). Sounds like it's been constructed for a different purpose compared to the Nikon 'equivalent'. I'm guessing the build of the Nikon is nowhere near as good as the canon version.
 
Something I've already looked at, and to some extent done, at least the weight saving, not sure my old bones would cope with camping anymore ...

I'd suggest the newer Nikon 18-35 AFS G and the new 70-300 AFP (make sure to get the FX version) - you give up f2.8 and in the case of the 70-300 vs 70-200 a tiny bit of IQ, but save a load of weight and gain a bit of reach too. The 18-35 has better IQ where it overlaps with the 24-70 and goes wider but is obviously slower (AF is quick enough btw). The AF on the new AFP version of the 70-300 is fast.

The other option is a lighter system ... (been there too and I'm staying with Nikon for now)
 
Ive been planning a few overnight wild camping trips too and going down the lighter gear route too. Using the lighter Olympus micro 4/3rds system and tentwise using the Laser competition tent, look at your rucksack too, cheaper ones will be upward of 2kg empty! Osprey seem to have about the lightest vs volumes and thats what I have.
 
The 1.8g primes are lightweight due to the plastic build but the iq is right up there. If, and I appreciate this is an if, you had an idea of a shot you were planning on taking from a wild camp location you could grab say a 20mm and 50mm and just take them. Together they are half the weight of your 24-70...
 
Craig_85 said:
The 1.8g primes are lightweight due to the plastic build but the iq is right up there. If, and I appreciate this is an if, you had an idea of a shot you were planning on taking from a wild camp location you could grab say a 20mm and 50mm and just take them. Together they are half the weight of your 24-70...
Click to expand...
Thanks for the idea. I've had a few primes in the past but I find I don't get on too well with short primes as I find it difficult to see which focal length I need for a composition and end up swapping lenses too many times for my liking. I think I'm just to used to the convenience of zoom to see a composition. Also if possible I would like to cover the 24mm to 200mm range as much as possible if I can in a one lens setup.
 
Last edited:
I’ve had and sold the 24-120 F4

It’s a great lens and probably the best 5x zoom lens out there. But and a big but it is a compromise zoom.

It’s very sharp in the centre till about 100mm but gets increasingly weaker in the edges and corner level from 24mm onwards. It’s not what I would want as a landscape lens especially after 70mm.
 
This is the kind of thing I would use my Nikon1 kit for. I'm sure you could pick up a body and a lens or two for less money than the lenses you are looking at... FWIW, it's a 2.7x crop factor so the widest lens available would be 18mm equiv FOV (6.7-13mm).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top