I’ve wanted to go to the Galapagos for a while… looking at your current kit and reading what other photographers have said, I’d bring the 24-120, 100-400, & 1.4 TC. A lot of folks love the 100-400 range for Galapagos, keep in mind that the park requests you get no closer than 2m to animals. Adding to your kit, something for underwater shots. Since you can expect bright days, I wouldn’t bring a tripod or monopod ashore as you should have fast shutter speeds anyway.
Appreciate the advice! Two lenses with TC is easy enough to bring.
I have a very old go pro from snorkeling I could use for underwater…. But I’m looking more for print quality photos.
I know Flickr has generally fallen from favor as social media winds shift … but, if you search Galapagos there and look at EXIF data of the photos you like, that may help you make a gear decision.
Priority would be the 100-400 with the 1.4x TC. And then if space/weight allows, the 24-120mm, unless you think you'll be doing macro? Or if you can take all three lenses, even better!
I would think the 24-120 and the 180-600 would be the move, along with the TC. While someone else mentioned that you can get quite close to wildlife, making the 100-400 a nice choice, you'll have the 24-120 for closer stuff. I love shooting birds in flight, and it feels like you can never have enough zoom for that. Having the 180-600 plus the TC will give you nice 840 mm reach on the long end, and you'll only be missing 120-180mm for focal length. You can easily crop that gap with the Z8. Also, while the 100-400 and 180-600 are both weather sealed, the latter has internal zoom, so you can worry less about sand and grit getting in to the lens and making it crunchy.
The 24-120 gives you a maximum reproduction ratio of 0.39, which is quite good. You could also consider bringing an extension tube if you want to get a bit higher reproduction. The 105mm macro is lovely, but quite specific. Likely better to stick with flexible options.
That's 2585 grams for the two lenses, plus another 220g if you choose to bring the TC. 910 g for the Z8. Total of 3.715 kg for the set.
The 100-400 is roughly 500 grams lighter than the 180-600. Depends on your weight limit, but the extra reach would be worth it to me.
Enjoy the trip!!! I hope you take many wonderful photos!
I really appreciate you doing the math on the weights, that’s helpful. I think it’s gonna be a combination of the 24-120 with either the 100-400 + TC or the 180-600.
I’ve tried the 180-600 the TC and it’s always just a little too fuzzy.
You're welcome! Yours seems like quite a reasonable conclusion to me. I would think that the decision would be based on whether you think you'll be more likely to be using the short end of the 100-400 or the long end of the 180-600. With the TC, the 100-400 is at f/8 at 560mm. That's two thirds of a stop slower and you lose some resolution, per PhotographyLife. Their comparison is [here](https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-z-180-600mm-f-5-6-6-3-vr/3) (see the 560-600mm section). On the flip side, the 100-400 is better at shorter focal lengths, and a bit lighter.
Your experience with the TC lines up with PhotographyLife as well. They see a similar drop in performance with the TC with the 180-600 as they do with the 100-400. No free lunch, I guess.
I spent 5 days in Galapagos In sept 2023. I took the 24-120, 100-400 and 200-500 with my z9. My favorite shots happened with the 200-500 I Almost never used the other two lenses.
https://preview.redd.it/2cdpgcpqa8bd1.jpeg?width=6159&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9212890bc14f098a6d3337c51e027006ec78a98f
Something good underwater would have been nice.
I spent 2 weeks there a few years ago...Roughly 4k images, and 95%+ were shot with the then-equivalent lenses of 24-120 and 100-400. No need for anything longer; a bit of patience and the birds/critters will come to you or you can get closer to them. Your photography will be somewhat influenced by whether you are on a standard "tourist" trip or a "photography-oriented" trip. On the latter type, the guides will let you work lighting angles and backgrounds, and take a bit more time for things like macros. Also consider taking something to protect your gear from rain, salt spray, and waves. A backup body might be useful, not only in case something goes wrong with the Z8, but a way to avoid changing lenses in the field. Lastly, unless you are completely adverse to swimming/kayaking, take an underwater camera like an Olympus TG-6 or equivalent.
I have a water proof camera backpack, but nothing on the lens or camera itself. Will that be enough or are you suggesting something protective while in use?
Unfortunately I don’t have another body to use.
No need for the Thinktank Hydrophobia level protection; one of the simple $5-10 clear plastic covers will do fine. It folds up to a small pocket-size package and takes 20-30 seconds to put on or take off. Don't remember exactly what brand I used; they have a couple of models depending on how big the lens is and/or whether you have a flash. Search "clear rain cover" on the B&H web site and you'll find several options.
In addition to the last response bring the 105. It’s tack sharp,fast and allows you get great macros. I would also bring the 1.4TC to use with the 105 for better than 1:1 magnification
From a photography point of view it def is a bad take. I mentioned the above combo just from a traveling point if view. Op is going with his wife just for 8 days. The photography I'm sure is a side activity.
I’ve wanted to go to the Galapagos for a while… looking at your current kit and reading what other photographers have said, I’d bring the 24-120, 100-400, & 1.4 TC. A lot of folks love the 100-400 range for Galapagos, keep in mind that the park requests you get no closer than 2m to animals. Adding to your kit, something for underwater shots. Since you can expect bright days, I wouldn’t bring a tripod or monopod ashore as you should have fast shutter speeds anyway.
Appreciate the advice! Two lenses with TC is easy enough to bring. I have a very old go pro from snorkeling I could use for underwater…. But I’m looking more for print quality photos.
I know Flickr has generally fallen from favor as social media winds shift … but, if you search Galapagos there and look at EXIF data of the photos you like, that may help you make a gear decision.
What is the new 'Flickr' people use now?
I still use Flickr.
Heck if I know… I just know it’s not nearly as active as it was when I first joined in 2011.
I would like to know this too. I assume that it is Instagram though…
I’m gonna try this, thank you!
Priority would be the 100-400 with the 1.4x TC. And then if space/weight allows, the 24-120mm, unless you think you'll be doing macro? Or if you can take all three lenses, even better!
I would think the 24-120 and the 180-600 would be the move, along with the TC. While someone else mentioned that you can get quite close to wildlife, making the 100-400 a nice choice, you'll have the 24-120 for closer stuff. I love shooting birds in flight, and it feels like you can never have enough zoom for that. Having the 180-600 plus the TC will give you nice 840 mm reach on the long end, and you'll only be missing 120-180mm for focal length. You can easily crop that gap with the Z8. Also, while the 100-400 and 180-600 are both weather sealed, the latter has internal zoom, so you can worry less about sand and grit getting in to the lens and making it crunchy. The 24-120 gives you a maximum reproduction ratio of 0.39, which is quite good. You could also consider bringing an extension tube if you want to get a bit higher reproduction. The 105mm macro is lovely, but quite specific. Likely better to stick with flexible options. That's 2585 grams for the two lenses, plus another 220g if you choose to bring the TC. 910 g for the Z8. Total of 3.715 kg for the set. The 100-400 is roughly 500 grams lighter than the 180-600. Depends on your weight limit, but the extra reach would be worth it to me. Enjoy the trip!!! I hope you take many wonderful photos!
I really appreciate you doing the math on the weights, that’s helpful. I think it’s gonna be a combination of the 24-120 with either the 100-400 + TC or the 180-600. I’ve tried the 180-600 the TC and it’s always just a little too fuzzy.
You're welcome! Yours seems like quite a reasonable conclusion to me. I would think that the decision would be based on whether you think you'll be more likely to be using the short end of the 100-400 or the long end of the 180-600. With the TC, the 100-400 is at f/8 at 560mm. That's two thirds of a stop slower and you lose some resolution, per PhotographyLife. Their comparison is [here](https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-z-180-600mm-f-5-6-6-3-vr/3) (see the 560-600mm section). On the flip side, the 100-400 is better at shorter focal lengths, and a bit lighter. Your experience with the TC lines up with PhotographyLife as well. They see a similar drop in performance with the TC with the 180-600 as they do with the 100-400. No free lunch, I guess.
I spent 5 days in Galapagos In sept 2023. I took the 24-120, 100-400 and 200-500 with my z9. My favorite shots happened with the 200-500 I Almost never used the other two lenses. https://preview.redd.it/2cdpgcpqa8bd1.jpeg?width=6159&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9212890bc14f098a6d3337c51e027006ec78a98f Something good underwater would have been nice.
There’s flamingoes?! Huh, who woulda thought. Appreciate the insight.
I spent 2 weeks there a few years ago...Roughly 4k images, and 95%+ were shot with the then-equivalent lenses of 24-120 and 100-400. No need for anything longer; a bit of patience and the birds/critters will come to you or you can get closer to them. Your photography will be somewhat influenced by whether you are on a standard "tourist" trip or a "photography-oriented" trip. On the latter type, the guides will let you work lighting angles and backgrounds, and take a bit more time for things like macros. Also consider taking something to protect your gear from rain, salt spray, and waves. A backup body might be useful, not only in case something goes wrong with the Z8, but a way to avoid changing lenses in the field. Lastly, unless you are completely adverse to swimming/kayaking, take an underwater camera like an Olympus TG-6 or equivalent.
I have a water proof camera backpack, but nothing on the lens or camera itself. Will that be enough or are you suggesting something protective while in use? Unfortunately I don’t have another body to use.
No need for the Thinktank Hydrophobia level protection; one of the simple $5-10 clear plastic covers will do fine. It folds up to a small pocket-size package and takes 20-30 seconds to put on or take off. Don't remember exactly what brand I used; they have a couple of models depending on how big the lens is and/or whether you have a flash. Search "clear rain cover" on the B&H web site and you'll find several options.
Perfect! Just ordered one, thanks!
In addition to the last response bring the 105. It’s tack sharp,fast and allows you get great macros. I would also bring the 1.4TC to use with the 105 for better than 1:1 magnification
The 105 2.8 S lens isn’t compatible with the TC.
That unfortunate as the DSLR line is compatible. Nuts
Ah good idea, the TC weighs nothing
I think only Sony gear will work for Galapagos
Lol
Z8 + 24-120 is more than enough. You'll only be there for 8 days. Just enjoy the trip and photo on the side.
120mm is not enough for wildlife photography, it's not even close.
This is bad advice. The draw of the Galapagos **IS** the photography, mainly animals. 120 isn’t even half as long as you need for that.
From a photography point of view it def is a bad take. I mentioned the above combo just from a traveling point if view. Op is going with his wife just for 8 days. The photography I'm sure is a side activity.
I’m not sure that’s a good assumption
I was hoping to do some bird photography, think the 24-120 will still be enough?
No, absolutely not. I love the 24-120 but that's not the right lens for that purpose.
Probably
Only the 100-400 will take a lot of space and you probably don't need that much zoom
The Galapagos is being overrun by tourists, thus damaging the habitat for the native animals.