Only 3 Lenses You'll Ever Need For Nature Photography

[@adriandoko]

Excellent in-depth and informative Video!

[@Nateinthewild]

Cheers, thanks Adrian!

[@TerezaBarloon]

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)

[@JLC2334]

I'm going to go with 70-200 f2.8+tc

[@mountains_and_moors]

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 👍🏻😉

[@Nateinthewild]

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.

[@guenterwittholm]

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 🙂

[@JPMNRB]

Im renting the 100-400 and with the 24-70, the 20mm and 14mm I'm set.

[@htplex]

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.

[@EmoEmu]

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.

[@chiang7]

Had those exact on Mauna Kea last night! Taught me well, you have.

[@Nateinthewild]

That's what I like to hear!!

[@TheJournalofLostTime]

This is remarkably helpful. Also, the music.

[@JasonOYoung]

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

[@Nateinthewild]

Sounds like my next video needs to be about how great telephoto lenses are for landscapes!

[@KorbenDenver]

Thanks for the info, Nateinthewild!

[@Nateinthewild]

Thanks for watching, Korben!

[@SiLvErZoMbiiE]

Really good video! I actually have the same setup! And the 50mm macro for playing around haha

[@KrisLuckPhoto]

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)

[@DavidTwomey3]

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 😢

[@robertdoyle8972]

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

[@Nateinthewild]

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?

[@robertdoyle8972]

@@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

[@Nateinthewild]

It will be an f/5.6 once you put the TC on it. So same range as the 100-400, worse image quality

[@robertdoyle8972]

@@Nateinthewild at the 400 end of the 100-400 it is a 5.6 also

[@Nateinthewild]

@@robertdoyle8972 Yep, that's exactly my point.

[@RamusJamus]

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! :)

[@VeeTravels]

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.

[@ChrisMitchell-iq1cc]

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?

[@LeBoned]

Great picks!

[@joey.3200]

Nate, have you yet tried or tested the new 70-200mm F4 Macro G II?

[@Nateinthewild]

I have! I tested it once and bought it immediately

[@joey.3200]

@@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. ✌️

[@fuxing81]

Thanks for sharing, I think the so called "Trinity Lens" was old term, new one should be lens you described in this video.

[@jacob_houser5204]

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?

[@Nateinthewild]

You're in luck, I have a video just for that! kzbin.info/www/bejne/bmjaY3dqoZ2Gj80

[@Nateinthewild]

Also worth checking out the Hyperlite Camera Pod. Not cheap by any means, but weighs practically nothing!

[@SnehPatel96]

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

[@mike_abramyan]

Nice video! Personally I've been rocking 24, 85, and 100-400 for years. I never bring the 100-400 with me either.

[@Nateinthewild]

I’m a little confused by that last sentence

[@MsBlobz315]

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

[@Nateinthewild]

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?

[@MsBlobz315]

@@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!

[@vanguardist]

What operator did you use for Gates?

[@Nateinthewild]

Coyote Air out of Coldfoot

[@davidligon6088]

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).

[@Nateinthewild]

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]

How do you like the 20-70G? Sharpness and usefulness?

[@davidligon6088]

@@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.

[@saulsigalov]

@@davidligon6088 Thanks for this blurb - I just switched to a sony system with a7iv and first lens was 20-70. Love the versatility after a quick overnighter in the backcountry. I was debating what to get on the wide end because I love the ultra shots but I find I get pretty close to them with a 3 shot vertical pano at 20mm. However we did have some nice stars out that night and the f4 didn't cut it (not knocking the lens, just not designed for it). I was thinking of doing the 14mm for stars and ultra wide, 20-70 and mid range, and save up for a 100-400 sony GM for the long end

[@davidligon6088]

@@saulsigalov I, personally think that is a great solution. That said, if I were wanting something wider for hiking, I would get the 16-35 f4 G. Sure, an f/1.4,1.8,2.8 is great for Astro, but I find F4 not a problem, as long as it is good wide open, and you do some stacking. I use the 14mm f/1.8 and the 16-35 f/2.8 GM I for Milky Way and use the 70-200 F4 G II or the 100-400 f/5.6 GM for smaller stuff most of the time, but I have used the 24-105 and the 20-70, and even the Tamron 28-200 numerous times with great results for Milky Way or moonlit landscapes. My goal is to fit whatever I carry in my 7L shoulder bag for day outings, unless I’m going specifically for wildlife. That is usually the 20-70 and 70-200 or 100-400. I have carried the 14, 20-70 and 70-200 before on a 4 mile mountain loop in that bag. This trip, I brought the 14, 20-70, 70-200, and 100-400 in a backpack. Will only carry 2 of those at a time, in the shoulder bag, on day hikes, city walks, or bike rides.

[@tylerlahanas6135]

As an Italian raised by Brooklyn mobsters, I'm deeply offended by that abomination at 2:44

[@Nateinthewild]

Deeply offended, or deeply relieved to finally see representation?