I recently responded to a comment about what we have in our camera bag. But I did it as a reply to that specific comment. I’ve since had additional questions about the camera/video equipment we use. Hence this post.
It goes without saying that we all have our interests/hobbies. Photography and videography — and travel, of course — rank high for us. I would describe us as avid amateurs when it comes to documenting our adventures — be they by air, land, or sea. I’m the still photographer; Mui focuses mostly on videos.
Please don’t take our ‘camera bag’ as the must-have equipment for this (or any other trip). As our hobby has evolved, so has our equipment. And so have the complications. For example, it’s impossible for us to travel with just carry-on bags; they are dedicated to our cameras.
One point I would like to make before I get into details. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with using a point and shoot (P&S) camera. But if you’re going to do that, be aware of its zoom limitations. Please … please … please — don’t hound the wildlife in your quest to get a closer picture of your subject. Changing natural habits of the wildlife we seek to enjoy should never be a result of our actions.
Erin’s Bag
I have two Canon 7D DSLR bodies — I prefer not to switch lenses if I can help it. I recently downsized my lenses from four to two; both are Canon: an EF-S 17-55 f2.8 and an EF-S 70-200 f2.8L IS II. For now these are sufficient to cover most of my needs.
I have both the Canon 1.4x II and the 2x III extenders to increase the reach of my 70-200 mm lens. I used the 2x for a lot of my wildlife photos on this trip. Since the 7D has a built-in 1.6 crop factor, on this camera the 2x gave me a 640mm reach on the long end of the lens.
To reduce the weight I was carrying on walks, I elected to leave the second DSLR body with the 17-55 mm in the cabin. Instead, I used my Canon Powershot G12 compact camera for landscapes and such.
Speaking of carrying, I wore my Cotton Carrier camera vest/halter at all times. With it, I’ve been able to easily carry a camera/lens combo weighing 8 pounds (3.5+ kg) without neck/shoulder stress. (On this trip the 70-200 combo was about 6 pounds (2.7 kg).
I have six 4GB and one 32GB flashcards for the 7D, and four 2 GB cards for the G12. They were more than sufficient; I backed up and formatted cards after each landing.
Though I prefer to use a tripod or monopod, due to the fast-paced nature of this trip, I took neither with me this time.
Mui’s Bag
Mui’s main video camera is the Sony HDR-FX1000; surprisingly lightweight for its size. He used this camera exclusively on land and on the zodiac rides. A compact table-top tripod added additional stability on land.
The back-up video camera is a Sony HDR-HC9 Mini DV. This is the camera he usually uses for underwater videos (with an underwater housing), but this time he opted for a simpler solution.
Underwater videos were taken using a Canon Powershot S95 P&S, which has HD video capability. We purchased a separate underwater casing for the camera. While this is less convenient than a waterproof camera, Mui prefers it as the casing adds bulk and buoyancy, and makes the camera easier to hold; steadier footage, too.
Other
We use Macbook Pro laptops with 1TB external drives to back up photos and videos. I shoot raw and post-process files almost exclusively with Adobe Lightroom. I prefer to process photos on the Mac at home, although the laptop does come in handy to process the occasional photo while on the trip. Mui uses iMovie to edit his videos.
Hope this information is useful to others.
that is quite the camera gear you carry!..we just have canon xs20..works fine for now..although a camera with removable lenses would be nice one day!
ReplyDeleteNow this is indeed interesting. I have two lenses, 16-85 and 70-300, but slower than yours (f/3.5-5.6 and f/4.5-5.6, respectively) and lower in quality. You have two high-quality, fast (f/2.8) lenses, and don't seem to mind the missing 55-70 range. I wonder if I should switch to your selection? Do you find that you take advantage of the faster speed? (P.S. Love the travelogue... I check every day for a new installment!)
ReplyDeleteI used to have a lens that went up to 85mm, but opted to replace it with the 17-55 because I was finding it didn't perform as well in low-light conditions where a flash wasn't allowed. There are times when I wish for just that extra bit of length if I'm traveling with just that one lens, but the quality of the image allows me to crop the photos later if necessary. The f2.8s are not cheap, so only you can decide whether the extra $ layout is worth it for your purposes.
DeleteGlad you're enjoying the travelogue; if work doesn't get in the way, there should be another post tonight :-))
Missed saying that yes, I do take advantage of the faster speed ... and my 70-200mm ... I had the lighter, smaller f4 version, but since I knew I was going to want to use an extender frequently, I sold it and got the f2.8 version instead so that I could still be at a more reasonable f5.6 vs f8 for the bird shots.
DeleteFamiliar with your collection, just wanted to see how it looks on my new toy :))
ReplyDeletePretty cool!
bought a 28-300mm F3.5-5.6 lens today. That will give me one lens, so no lens changes required. The 80-200 F2.8 lens plus 1.7 teleconverter is really quite heavy. That would become a problem. Now I am testing sharpness of the new lens. From the reviews it is said it is a fairly good lens. Of course not as sharp as prime lenses, but then you would have to take 4 lenses. And I know that you always have the wrong one on when you encounter wild life.
ReplyDeleteI have a full frame camera and a DX camera, so I can even choose to use the DX camera, then with the crop factor (1,5 for Nikon) it would look like a 450mm lens. Now that is nice!
I know I'd go with the DX camera if it were me :-)
Deletejust noticed that the Canon D7 is not a full frame camera, meaning there is a crop factor.
ReplyDeleteThe 70-200mm lens when used with the teleconverter 2x at 200mm would give 400mm focal distance.
But due to the crop factor it would act as a lens of 600mm focal distance.
Yes; it's about 640mm at the long end with the crop and the 2x ... there were times when I pushed it all the way up to the max; but I would guess that most shots were at about 400-500mm range.
DeleteThe crop factor has it's pros and cons, but every time I think of getting a full sensor body, the loss of additional reach the crop affords me holds me back. The 7D works for this amateur photographer :-)
I have a full frame camera (Nikon D700) and an older APC camera. I also shoot sports inside small halls. The full frame camera allows me a much higher iso rating. I can push it up to 3000 or 4000 iso with very little visible noise.
DeleteOr inside a museum where you are not allowed flash photography I can raise it to 6400 iso get a little noise but can take a perfect picture, even when it is nearly dark inside.
I will bring both cameras but still contemplating which one to use. The full frame which is faster and would allow me to use a higher aperture value but a smaller focal distance value.
Or the APC camera (Nikon D90) which would resemble a 300mm lens at maximum distance, but with lower light, so smaller aperture value.
Pros and cons as well. I have to say I am very happy with the full frame camera and favour it over the APC camera.
It is definitely worthwhile investing in one.
No doubt the full sensor is a better camera; perhaps someday!
Delete