Jump to content

Long reach backpacking lens?


stevehollx
 Share

Recommended Posts

Currently converting from a Canon 7d over to the a7rii platform and will be getting the 24-70/2.8 to handle most tasks.

 

I use to hang on to a Canon EF-S 55-250 to take backpacking, since it was light and was useful for the occasional long reach shot (wildlife, etc.).  At a glance I don't see any good options for light long reach lenses for FE mounts.  What are people taking into the backcountry when they want long reach?

 

The 24-70/2.8 which is on the heavy side to pack with, but manageable.  In theory, I could keep the canon 55-250 and adapt it for this purpose, but seems silly to have the MB adapter for a single cheap lens.  The 24-240 doesn't seem to have great reviews, but in theory would be a nice approach of only packing one lens for this purpose.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The 24-240 doesn't seem to have great reviews, but in theory would be a nice approach of only packing one lens for this purpose.

 

Any thoughts?

The 24-240 has had very good reviews and is regarded as a very good lens, particularly considering it's a 10:1 zoom.

My friend has one and he loves it, there is certainly nothing wrong with the images he takes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 24-240 has had very good reviews and is regarded as a very good lens, particularly considering it's a 10:1 zoom.

 

It's important to set expectations: it is a superzoom, and as such it will not have the world's greatest image quality.  I've never used that lens, but most/all reviewers seem surprised by it's quality.  So my interpretation is that it is among best superzooms out there, and is therefore worthy of consideration if long reach and convenience are a priority for you.

Note: The only superzoom I've ever used is the Sigma 18-250, and I was grossly disappointed in that one.  That lens gave me such a bad impression of superzooms, that I've never had an interest to try another one ever again.  But having said that, based on the reviews of the 24-240, I would be willing to give that one a try if I had a need for it.

 

However, if image quality is a bigger concern, and you're not afraid of swapping lenses out in the bush, I would pick the 70-300 without a second thought.  It's noticeably longer and and faster at the long end, and it's not significantly more expensive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 24-240 has had very good reviews and is regarded as a very good lens, particularly considering it's a 10:1 zoom.

My friend has one and he loves it, there is certainly nothing wrong with the images he takes.

 

Problem is the weight, if your doing _real_ backpacking, which for this lens is twice that of the Canon lens.

 

RX10 mk3 goes to "600" ... and does it all ... otherwise FF = Heavy, best bet could be a Batis 85 + cropping, which I'm told is quite possible with the A7rii.

 

I'm waiting/hoping for a Batis 135mm for more or less the same reason. I guess it will be quite a bit lighter than the 70-200G I currently schlep around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider an a6000 plus 55-210/4.5-6.3 as your long

reach device. You pack 24mp behind a rather good

zoom lensof modest weight and reasonable size. It's

better than packing atiny-sensor bridge camera with

a "600mm equivalent" lens. Yes, it's a bit bigger than

any bridge camera but you can also find other good

uses for the a6000 when not hiking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Use the APS-C 55-210, still gives you 18mp.

   

No need to lose half of your MP count. Use

Clear Image Zoom. This will maintain your 

full MP count for smoothness of tones and

helps reduce pixelating of contrast edges.

Acoarst it can't restore any lost detail, but 

it sorta disguises the loss.  

  

Also, since CIZ is incremental, any parts of

the zoom range that might provide a larger

than APS-C sized image circle will benefit

from reducing the magnification of the CIZ.  

    

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

    

Using the LA-EA2 which was designed for

APS-C bodies, but using it with FF lenses

on a FF body, I find many lens-plus-adapter

combinations have an image circle larger

than APS-C but smaller than FF. The CIZ is

very quick and easy to fine tune to whatever

magnification includes the maximum use of  

the available.image circle. You can do this 

same thing with APS-C zooms, cuz some

included FL will often have image coverage

larger than needed for strictly just APS-C. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The FE 70-300 G lens (f4.5-5.6) is probably OK for backpacking.

I have one and I'm very pleased with it in all respects. It's a bit shorter then the FE 70-200 G f4, not as fast (f4 vs f4.5-5.6) but does have an extra 100mm reach.

 

Paul

 

I made some test-shots with the FE 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6.

 

Result: On longer distances you have to stop it down to f/8.0 for getting sharp images  - so in reality it's only a f/8.0-lens:

too slow for me, even for landscape photography!

 

So for backpacking I would rather recommend the Sony FE 70-200mm f/4.0 G OSS - relatively light and handy, delivering goog image quality even wide open (f/4.0), excellent around 135mm, and still good enough at 200mm.

 

If weight and money do not matter: Take the new Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS - in this range probably the best zoom on the market!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...