Hiking up or down, you gotta take the gear! My setup isn’t too different. The 24-70 is amazing but found it was my go too so removed it. Now hiking/wild camping with the 20mmm f1.8 G and the 70-200mm f2.8 GM2 with a 2x teleconverter. Having the 2.8 and shooting at 5.6 at 400mm is my preferred option over the 100-400 and much lighter. Would suggest giving it a go! ATB Ant 👍🏻😉
Hiking uphill is the way. Downhill is knee pain, toe pain, fear of death… that sort of thing. Edit: now that I’ve watched the video- would you recommend getting the 70-200 2.8 with the 2x tele converter? I’ve read opinions that 2x is too much because of the consequent smaller aperture (but with 2.8 that’s still 5.6, but I don’t have enough experience to know how big deal is that “in the wild” on a tele lens)
100% agree! I also find that the Sony 100-400 often manages to get "close enough" that I don't need my macro lens, so it's been shelved a few times, if I don't KNOW that I'll need it.
I’ll be travelling Scandinavia next year and can’t decide between the 14 GM or the 20 G. The price difference at the moment is a lot but as you said the 14 is a must for scandi 😢
Excellent content as usual dude! 24-120 is always in my bag on backpacking trips. 14-24 if astro is in the cards and 50 is so light you might as well bring it. Good thing I don't do wildlife lol
I love coming across these kind of videos because i enjoy seeing what Lenses people carry and how they use em! My go-to travel kit is similar-ish, I will always pack my 16-35GM and paired it with my tamron 35-150 f2-2.8. Then depending on where im going ill also bring my 200-600 G, i dont back pack so i can get away with the extra weight. This was a fun video to watch and i look forward to seeing more in the future! :)
Great video. For telephoto, I’ve been using the Sony E 70-350 with the a7rv in crop mode or with the a6700, which I often carry as a backup. Any thoughts on that lens vs the 100-400?
Thanks for the video, Nateinthewild. I am wondering if this lens is better than the new Sigma 60-600mm. I am deciding between this or the Sony 100-400mm G Master.
What about just using a converter with the 70-200mm 2.8 ii that’s what I”M thinking of getting to go with the one I have or getting the 200-600mm and I live here in Alaska and get to see a lot of bears and Engels and all the Alaska stuff all the time
I think you should get the 200-600, or the 100-400 without a doubt. 70-200 is not enough for bears and eagles, and the TC really reduces sharpness. Plus, if you're going to use a TC, why not put it on the 100-400 to make it a 200-800?
Great walk-through of your thought process. I arrived at a similar solution except I went with a 14mm f1.8 GM, 20-70mm f4 G, and 100-400mm GM. I don’t take the 14mm if I know I won’t be shooting night skies. Curious why you did not just add a 2x TC to the 70-200 (lighter than the 100-400 and about the same IQ from what I’ve heard).
Less range (140mm on the short end vs 100mm), and less aperture (f/5.6 vs f/4.5 on the short end). Plus my TC is really soft. Not sure if I just got a bad copy, but it's a last resort for me.
@@chun-weipan6287 I love the 20-70 G. It has become my favorite lens. The sharpness is outstanding, and it is just plain fun to use. Some have tested it as sharp as the 24-70 GM II. That said, you do need to turn on lens corrections to get rid of the distortion. It largely replaced my 16-35 and my 24-105. It is sharper than either. I now carry it on hikes along with a 70-200MACRO G II as a “lightweight” setup in a small (7L) shoulder bag. The 70-200 G II is also outstandingly sharp and I can fit a 1.4x TC in the shoulder bag too if I feel the need. A panorama with three vertical shots at 20mm gets me an equivalent 14mm FOV so I leave the 14mm GM at home most of the time too. If I’m going to Yosemite or Death Valley or some other iconic place I’ll break out the backpack and load the 14mm GM, 20-70mm G, and 100-400 GM with a 1.4 TC. If I’m going out to shoot birds or wildlife I only take the 200-600. That said, I’ve gotten some great Osprey shots with the 70-200 G II + 1.4 TC. I gave the 24-105 to my daughter.
I've actually been building out a very similar kit for all the same reasons, I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking a lightweight wide prime is the way to go on that end of the range :) For your 70-200 v. 100-400, I'm wondering if you considered going 70-200 + teleconverter? I know teleconverters are controversial, but it seems like a tempting combo
I have both the 2x and the 1.4x and they’re ok. A bit of a trade off in sharpness but that’s acceptable sometimes, but IMO if you’re going to use a TC then it’s still even better on the 100-400, ya know?
@@Nateinthewild I guess my thinking was you use a TC to get the range of a 100-400 using the 70-200, but you're definitely right about the sharpness. Thanks so much for the response!
@@Nateinthewild haha Nice! I had a feeling you might have. We can't wait to see an updated 'What's In My Bag' after all these new lens acquisitions. ✌️
How do you pack your lenses? Specifically the telephotos. I have a hard time packing my 100-400 in a safe way in say my backpacking pack or other hiking packs. Sometimes I wrap it in a hoodie (not ideal) and sometimes I keep it in the carrying case the lens came with (takes up a lot of space). Any pointers?
![ว้าว!ลุงบีมแบกทองมารับขวัญหลานกันยกบ้าน [cc] แดนแพทตี้ SS2 | EP.49 |](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Osihq1OAs-4/mqdefault.jpg)
Excellent in-depth and informative Video!
Cheers, thanks Adrian!
Hiking up or down, you gotta take the gear! My setup isn’t too different. The 24-70 is amazing but found it was my go too so removed it. Now hiking/wild camping with the 20mmm f1.8 G and the 70-200mm f2.8 GM2 with a 2x teleconverter. Having the 2.8 and shooting at 5.6 at 400mm is my preferred option over the 100-400 and much lighter. Would suggest giving it a go! ATB Ant 👍🏻😉
I have the 1.4x and the 2x TC and the loss of sharpness for me is significant enough that I much prefer the 100-400 in all scenarios.
Hiking uphill is the way. Downhill is knee pain, toe pain, fear of death… that sort of thing.
Edit: now that I’ve watched the video- would you recommend getting the 70-200 2.8 with the 2x tele converter? I’ve read opinions that 2x is too much because of the consequent smaller aperture (but with 2.8 that’s still 5.6, but I don’t have enough experience to know how big deal is that “in the wild” on a tele lens)
I'm going to go with 70-200 f2.8+tc
100% agree!
I also find that the Sony 100-400 often manages to get "close enough" that I don't need my macro lens, so it's been shelved a few times, if I don't KNOW that I'll need it.
Love your shots and love your video man, haven’t picked up my camera for 6 months now but definitely motivated by those shots and will go somewhere.
Just changed my gear to the Sony 20-70 and the Tamron 50-400. Now all I need is the Sony 14mm 1.8 GM 🙂
I’ll be travelling Scandinavia next year and can’t decide between the 14 GM or the 20 G. The price difference at the moment is a lot but as you said the 14 is a must for scandi 😢
Excellent content as usual dude! 24-120 is always in my bag on backpacking trips. 14-24 if astro is in the cards and 50 is so light you might as well bring it. Good thing I don't do wildlife lol
Sounds like my next video needs to be about how great telephoto lenses are for landscapes!
I love coming across these kind of videos because i enjoy seeing what Lenses people carry and how they use em! My go-to travel kit is similar-ish, I will always pack my 16-35GM and paired it with my tamron 35-150 f2-2.8. Then depending on where im going ill also bring my 200-600 G, i dont back pack so i can get away with the extra weight.
This was a fun video to watch and i look forward to seeing more in the future! :)
Love the choices, i’ve been using fairly the same thing (100-500 canon, and 15-35 or 20f1.4 if it’s aurora season is only difference)
This is remarkably helpful. Also, the music.
Thanks for the info, Nateinthewild!
Thanks for watching, Korben!
I think everyone needs a handy 24-70 or 24-105 for just about anything can’t go wrong with a f2.8 or f4
Had those exact on Mauna Kea last night! Taught me well, you have.
That's what I like to hear!!
Really good video!
I actually have the same setup! And the 50mm macro for playing around haha
Great video. For telephoto, I’ve been using the Sony E 70-350 with the a7rv in crop mode or with the a6700, which I often carry as a backup. Any thoughts on that lens vs the 100-400?
Thanks for sharing, I think the so called "Trinity Lens" was old term, new one should be lens you described in this video.
Great picks!
Thanks for the video, Nateinthewild. I am wondering if this lens is better than the new Sigma 60-600mm. I am deciding between this or the Sony 100-400mm G Master.
What about just using a converter with the 70-200mm 2.8 ii that’s what I”M thinking of getting to go with the one I have or getting the 200-600mm and I live here in Alaska and get to see a lot of bears and Engels and all the Alaska stuff all the time
I think you should get the 200-600, or the 100-400 without a doubt. 70-200 is not enough for bears and eagles, and the TC really reduces sharpness. Plus, if you're going to use a TC, why not put it on the 100-400 to make it a 200-800?
@@Nateinthewild i will be getting the 200-600 and the reason for the converter is so I would have the 400 with the 70-200 because of it being the 2.8
It will be an f/5.6 once you put the TC on it. So same range as the 100-400, worse image quality
@@Nateinthewild at the 400 end of the 100-400 it is a 5.6 also
@@robertdoyle8972 Yep, that's exactly my point.
Nice video! Personally I've been rocking 24, 85, and 100-400 for years. I never bring the 100-400 with me either.
I’m a little confused by that last sentence
Great walk-through of your thought process. I arrived at a similar solution except I went with a 14mm f1.8 GM, 20-70mm f4 G, and 100-400mm GM. I don’t take the 14mm if I know I won’t be shooting night skies. Curious why you did not just add a 2x TC to the 70-200 (lighter than the 100-400 and about the same IQ from what I’ve heard).
Less range (140mm on the short end vs 100mm), and less aperture (f/5.6 vs f/4.5 on the short end). Plus my TC is really soft. Not sure if I just got a bad copy, but it's a last resort for me.
How do you like the 20-70G? Sharpness and usefulness?
@@chun-weipan6287 I love the 20-70 G. It has become my favorite lens. The sharpness is outstanding, and it is just plain fun to use. Some have tested it as sharp as the 24-70 GM II. That said, you do need to turn on lens corrections to get rid of the distortion. It largely replaced my 16-35 and my 24-105. It is sharper than either. I now carry it on hikes along with a 70-200MACRO G II as a “lightweight” setup in a small (7L) shoulder bag. The 70-200 G II is also outstandingly sharp and I can fit a 1.4x TC in the shoulder bag too if I feel the need. A panorama with three vertical shots at 20mm gets me an equivalent 14mm FOV so I leave the 14mm GM at home most of the time too. If I’m going to Yosemite or Death Valley or some other iconic place I’ll break out the backpack and load the 14mm GM, 20-70mm G, and 100-400 GM with a 1.4 TC. If I’m going out to shoot birds or wildlife I only take the 200-600. That said, I’ve gotten some great Osprey shots with the 70-200 G II + 1.4 TC. I gave the 24-105 to my daughter.
I've actually been building out a very similar kit for all the same reasons, I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking a lightweight wide prime is the way to go on that end of the range :)
For your 70-200 v. 100-400, I'm wondering if you considered going 70-200 + teleconverter? I know teleconverters are controversial, but it seems like a tempting combo
I have both the 2x and the 1.4x and they’re ok. A bit of a trade off in sharpness but that’s acceptable sometimes, but IMO if you’re going to use a TC then it’s still even better on the 100-400, ya know?
@@Nateinthewild I guess my thinking was you use a TC to get the range of a 100-400 using the 70-200, but you're definitely right about the sharpness. Thanks so much for the response!
Nate, have you yet tried or tested the new 70-200mm F4 Macro G II?
I have! I tested it once and bought it immediately
@@Nateinthewild haha Nice! I had a feeling you might have. We can't wait to see an updated 'What's In My Bag' after all these new lens acquisitions. ✌️
How do you pack your lenses? Specifically the telephotos. I have a hard time packing my 100-400 in a safe way in say my backpacking pack or other hiking packs. Sometimes I wrap it in a hoodie (not ideal) and sometimes I keep it in the carrying case the lens came with (takes up a lot of space). Any pointers?
You're in luck, I have a video just for that! th-cam.com/video/87w2D4l8SYk/w-d-xo.html
Also worth checking out the Hyperlite Camera Pod. Not cheap by any means, but weighs practically nothing!
As an Italian raised by Brooklyn mobsters, I'm deeply offended by that abomination at 2:44
Deeply offended, or deeply relieved to finally see representation?
What operator did you use for Gates?
Coyote Air out of Coldfoot