Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    30mins from the bush
    Posts
    421

    1 or 2 lenses on the hill

    What is everyone Skiing/Riding with? 1 all around lens or 2 (20-70mm range and 100-300mm)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Whistler
    Posts
    1,038
    This winter I plan on using 18-55 and 70-200. I'd like something wider but can't afford the lens I want yet.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Putney, VT
    Posts
    424
    11-16, 17-55, and 80-200. I always think about leaving one at home to save weight but never do. That 80-200L is a tank but always finds its way in my pack.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    [a] Van [down by the river]
    Posts
    1,511
    Used to just be a 17-50. Now it'll be a 17-40... New pack on it's way though which might mean the 70-200 will come out now as well...

    Mostly shooting while touring, and absolutely hate switching out lenses on the hill.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,792
    I take the 17-40 out touring, but I always wish I had a longer lens. I will eventually have the 70-200 as well. I would prefer to take both, but would choose the 70-200 if picking one. I think that would be a lot better for every day shooting while touring, since I try to have a lot of space between myself and my ski partners when in the BC.
    Ride Fast, Live slow.

    We're mountain people. This is what we do, this is how we live. -D.C.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    5,351
    Quote Originally Posted by jon turner View Post
    I take the 17-40 out touring, but I always wish I had a longer lens. I will eventually have the 70-200 as well. I would prefer to take both, but would choose the 70-200 if picking one. I think that would be a lot better for every day shooting while touring, since I try to have a lot of space between myself and my ski partners when in the BC.
    I find it tough to move around a lot when setting up a shot in the bc. Once you get your camera out, you pack is on the ground, snow is getting on everything, etc. Having the subject further away with a lot of zoom range like the 70-200 seems to make things easier. Now that I think about it, the real benefit to a chest pack would be the ability to move around a bit while shooting.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SCal CCNV SLC Van
    Posts
    317
    I roll with a 16-35 and a 70-200 usually, but I really like the days when I just have a body and the 16-35.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    726
    Quote Originally Posted by Dromond View Post
    I find it tough to move around a lot when setting up a shot in the bc. Once you get your camera out, you pack is on the ground, snow is getting on everything, etc. Having the subject further away with a lot of zoom range like the 70-200 seems to make things easier. Now that I think about it, the real benefit to a chest pack would be the ability to move around a bit while shooting.
    I tried to setup a Think Tank Digital Holster as a chest pack, but found that my knees hit it when skiing bumps, etc.

    Last year was the first with a DSLR and I either carried my 17-50 or 70-200. Looking at the focal lengths of my pictures, it seems like I would enjoy the 70-200 range better on a full frame rather than a 1.6 crop since I was often shooting at 70mm.

Posting Permissions

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