Camera Lenses for Hiking

[TurboPants]

I know a handful of you guys are photography buffs so I want to create a consensus or discussion on what styles of lenses you use, and why. I'd really like to avoid taking this to a debate of "35mm film vs 4/3 vs compact vs SLR" etc. This is strictly for dSLR users, full frame or crop sensor. So if you would, please post your GO-TO lenses you take hiking. The reason I'm asking is I'm trying to find a happy medium for taking a single lens that will cover all my bases.

I use a Sony A57 SLT. My current lenses are 18-55mm kit lens, 75-300mm f/4.5-6.5 and f/1.8 35mm prime (only 4oz!). I opted for the A57 because it's light, does HD video with manual controls and continuous AF. I hike with the 18-55 kit on it because it's decent quality and if it breaks, no loss. I keep the 35mm 1.8 in the pack for low light and the zoom lens doesn't usually go because 75mm (or 100mm on my crop sensor) is way too narrow. In the woods I don't want to switch lenses unless absolutely necessary though. I like to shoot wide panoramas and landscape shots but I like to sneak macros of insects and critters in when I can. I have not found a perfect go-to lens yet, which is why I'm asking what ONE lens you'd take if you were limited to one. Thanks in advance.

[mattjv89]

Are you asking us to pick one from the lenses you listed or a purchase recommendation from lenses in general? My answer happens to be nearly the same for both, I'd go with the 35. Though it doesn't have the same sweeping wide angle effect of an 18mm I can still get some good summit shots with a 35, and there's always that tendency to not really think much about composition when shooting with an 18 that will capture pretty much everything in front of the camera.

I personally use a 35mm Tokina f/2.8, which also happens to be a 1:1 macro. I love the versatility of capturing everything from a summit photo to an object the size of my thumbnail with one lens. I have no idea if they make that in a Sony mount but I'm happy with the build quality and photos it produces.

All that being said, these days I usually just shoot with my iPhone when backpacking. with an 8MP camera on board and a photo app that has better exposure controls than stock I can get great photos that are just fine for sharing online or a small print. Unless I want to make a big ole print of something I can rarely justify the weight of slinging the D90 along anymore, at least as far as backpacking goes.

[rafe]

All that being said, these days I usually just shoot with my iPhone when backpacking. with an 8MP camera on board and a photo app that has better exposure controls than stock I can get great photos that are just fine for sharing online or a small print. Unless I want to make a big ole print of something I can rarely justify the weight of slinging the D90 along anymore, at least as far as backpacking goes.

Not what the OP was asking at all, but this would be my answer as well. I take my photography pretty seriously, and over the years have spent thousands of $$$ on film cameras from 35 mm to medium format to 4x5, along with digital point-and-shoot cameras and a DSLR with a $600 Canon L zoom lens. Here are a couple from my smartphone (Samsung Galaxy S4) from two days ago. None of my other cameras can do a pano like that.

[colorado_rob]

I carry a Canon SL1 DSLR (APS-C sensor, 18MP) with the new canon ultrawide 10-18mm lens and a 40mm "pancake" lens, total weight including the Zing soft case and 1 extra battery is 2lb 6 ounces. Outstanding image capability with this setup, including Pano's.

[bigcranky]

I think anything with interchangeable lenses is fair game for this kind of discussion.

I've carried a Canon 5D Mark II with the 24-105/4 zoom while hiking. That made some great photos, but man was it ever a beast. It didn't help that I carried a too-heavy tripod because I wanted some night sky photos. I've also tried a Panasonic GF1 with the 20mm f/1.7, which is a sweet lens and made some terrific photos.

I've since replaced the tripod with a little carbon job that weighs about two pounds, and all my personal Canon gear with a Fuji setup. If the purpose of the trip is photography, then I can take one of the Fuji bodies, a couple of good zooms, and the nice little 14mm wide angle. I'd just leave the 18-55 on while walking. If I wanted a lighter setup, one body and the little 27mm pancake lens would be perfect.

All that said, photography is my day job and I hike mostly to get away from it So my hiking cameras tend to be high quality p+s models. I did just pick up a Sony RX1, a full frame camera with a 35mm f/2 fixed lens (the precursor to the A7.) It's very small and light, and would make an excellent trail camera for someone (like me) who can shoot all day with just a 35mm field of view. I'll have to try it next time.

[TurboPants]

Sorry if that was unclear, I'm just asking what are your go-to lenses when you hike if you can only take one lens.

My 35mm lens is nice but on my 1.5 aps-c that's a 48mm. Only good thing is I could do a pano shot with the 35mm if I needed a wider exposure. But pano mode slightly reduces quality because it is operating in burst rate. A huge reason I bought the A57 was for its panorama mode. It takes 192" wide 350dpi shots from 12 separate exposures and stitches them in-body. I know phones can do some cool stuff, but not to that quality yet. Mainly it's the night time astrophotos and time lapse control why I need an SLR sized camera.

bigcranky, I hoped you'd chime in but you're kinda making ME cranky because you have an RX10 and I don't! I've seen photos out of that camera that are better than my A57 with my 35mm. That zeiss lens is perfect for that body and sensor. It's a performer! Share some pics next time you're out with it!

[Shutterbug]

I rarely take more than one lens when I hike, so I use the Nikon 18 - 200 VR. The 18 is great for wide angle and the 200 is strong enough for wildlife. My current Nikon is a D300 and I shoot in RAW when I hike.

[bigcranky]

bigcranky, I hoped you'd chime in but you're kinda making ME cranky because you have an RX10 and I don't! I've seen photos out of that camera that are better than my A57 with my 35mm. That zeiss lens is perfect for that body and sensor. It's a performer! Share some pics next time you're out with it!

Sorry

Yeah, not sure really how the RX1 fits in with my other gear. I think it'll be a landscape camera on a tripod, sort of a miniature version of the old 6x9 Fuji rangefinders. The lens is quite excellent. I do think I'll take it on my next hike and see what happens.

To answer your question, then, the Fuji 27mm pancake lens. The Fujis will stitch, too, but I prefer to do it in post, using PTGui. That way I can shoot raw files and have some control over them before the stitching process.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JohnnySnook]

Some info from other thru hikers that hiked in 2013.

http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...on-a-Thru-Hike

Another blog from a 2013 thru hiker.
http://resonantliving.wordpress.com/...camera-review/

I just did a quick google search and found this link.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/40318488
I've never really gotten into stills but want to before and during my hike. Time to spend some time picking the brains of the camera crews in the next few months. Maybe pick up a well taken care of camera in the process.
Have a job coming up so I'll ask the stills crew what they think. It may not be better info than others have posted here but at least its another opinion.

[DandT40]

Last year I switched from lugging a huge/heavy Nikon dSLR and a 18-200 lens to a Sony mirrorless setup. First off for anyone still lugging the heavy dSLR's you really need to look into the new mirrorless setups. They are so much smaller and lighter I can't believe I carried that dSLR and huge lens for so long... But for me while backpacking I am almost solely interested in landscapes - I don't shoot much wildlife - so if I only have one lens it is the Sony E 10-18mm. On an APS-c sensor it has an effective focal range of about 16mm - 28mm. Because size and weight is a premium if I bring a second lens it is usually just the kit 16-50mm to have a cheap alternative with me.

[RockDoc]

I would go as wide as possible. Your best photos won't be views, they will be things closer in with a lot of information.

[ChuckT]

50 years a photographer here. Have carried 35mm SLR and then an APC DSLR.
Now a compact with a GPS.
Aways astonishes me when I see somebody toting more than one lens. Why? You can only use one at a time.
Which lens? You want a slight tele for a _few_ candids, a moderate wide for scenics and a good short normal for most of what you encounter.
Of course first you've got to decide - are you hiking or are you taking pixs?
Assuming you're wanting to carry a camera as versus using a cell phone or a GPS with a built in camera you're going to choose the APC or equivalent sensor and a moderate wide lens. In 35mm parlance that's a 35mm lens. Anything shorter and your backgrounds recede. Longer and you loose the "scenic" look. You want a panoramic? Flip the camera vertical shot a left - right or right-left series and get stitcher software.
A smaller, lighter camera will be handier and you'll carry and user it oftener and still get milage.