Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Going to Hawaii with new Canon T2i. Lens advice?

MacAztec

MacAztec

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Oct 28, 2001
3,028
1
San Luis Obispo, CA
Hey guys,

So I'm new to the world of DSLR Photography, but I picked up a Canon T2i with the standard kit lens back in October 2010 for a really good price ($350 said and done!). I've taken some great pictures since then. I'm shooting mostly in manual mode, although on hikes and stuff, I switch it over to P or TV for the shear ease of those modes.

Anyways, I'm heading to Hawaii in 2 weeks, and I thought about picking up another lens for the trip. I plan on doing a lot of nature hiking, finding waterfalls, awesome beaches, etc. Of course, I'll be surfing and stuff while I'm there, so maybe my GF can snag some photos of me too.

What lens would you recommend to take on this trip (in addition to the kit lens)?

Thanks!
 
Sorry, I can't offer you any advice on Canon lenes (Nikon user).

General lense advice: Don't buy a cheap lens just because you want another lens for your trip. I made that mistake and now have a lens that I never use. I just had to have it before the trip and now I know it isn't worth half the price I paid.

In any case enjoy your trip and your pictures. :)
 
If you can afford it one of the 70-200 L lens would be great for getting all those little details the standard kit would miss.

The 70-200 L F4 non IS can be had rather cheaply at £500, failing that perhaps a 55-250 EFS.
 
I visited Hawaii for the first time this past December -it was amazing. Except when I went to the North Shore to photograph the surf competition I pretty much left my 35mm mounted. Because I plan on upgrading to a full frame camera at some point I got the $ version of a 35mm but they do make lenses for crop frame cameras that may or may not interest you for less $.

http://dpreview.com/news/1103/11030705samyang35mm.asp

Some advice you're sure to hear over and over again is to invest your $ in good lens or two. This is sound advice.

Personally I would sugget getting a normal or normal to wide angle lens of fixed focal length. It may sound counter intuitive, but a fixed lens will help make you become a better photographer because of the limits it imposes on you, forcing you to move in relation to the subject or to otherwise see what the lens sees. You will get to know that focal length in a way that you can't really with a zoom.
 
An alternative to buying a new lens is to rent one for the trip. You can then take a fairly expensive lens on the cheap and see what you like before investing in anything. I was in the Islands in the "Film Era". I had a 35mm Canon and used a 50mm and a 70-200 something for most of my shots. Two hints for travel; Don't take an obviously expensive lens like the white Canon L lenses and make sure everything is covered by insurance. I will probably be going to Mexico this winter and I may take a good point and shoot rather than risk losing my DSLR kit.

Lens Rental

Dale
 
Designer Dale said:
An alternative to buying a new lens is to rent one for the trip. You can then take a fairly expensive lens on the cheap and see what you like before investing in anything. I was in the Islands in the "Film Era". I had a 35mm Canon and used a 50mm and a 70-200 something for most of my shots. Two hints for travel; Don't take an obviously expensive lens like the white Canon L lenses and make sure everything is covered by insurance. I will probably be going to Mexico this winter and I may take a good point and shoot rather than risk losing my DSLR kit.

Lens Rental

Dale
Click to expand...

Great advice - a Canon 24 1.4L lens is $65 a week here in NYC.
 
I was in Hawaii in August and the lenses i carried with me were 18-200, 50 1.8 and the 28mm 2.8 (nikon user)

however, the two lenses i used the most were the 18-200 and 50mm.

I strongly suggest something great in low light and light (in weight) and a nice walking around lens for those hikes where you don't want to juggle switching between lenses.

it's really tough to not take a good pic there.

What island(s) are you going to?
 
Hawaii is my favorite place to shoot!

Either buy or rent an UWA. I used both the Canon 10-22 and the Tokina 11-16f/2.8. Ended up using and loving the Tokina 11-16 for a couple years. It is excellent. You will surely want to capture the beautiful scenery in all its glory, and I find that UWA is my favorite way to do that!
 
As I mentioned in the other related thread, I'd highly recommend a Circular Polarizing filter for any trip to sunny locations, particularly tropical island destinations. A Cir. Pol. filter will really cut down on reflections off water, plants, and cut atmospheric haze providing significantly enhanced saturation to those lovely blue and green colors you will undoubtedly capture.

As for lenses, if you can somehow justify getting Canon's 17-55 f2.8 lens, you won't regret it. It constantly amazes me with the detail it captures, the color, and it's low light ability. If I could only take one lens, that would be the one. Other than that, a telephoto can come in handy... I hear the 55-250 compliments the kit lens nicely.
 
smithrh said:
Key question - have you been to Hawaii before?
Click to expand...

I have not been to Hawaii before. We're going to Maui.

wilhelmreems said:
I was in Hawaii in August and the lenses i carried with me were 18-200, 50 1.8 and the 28mm 2.8 (nikon user)

however, the two lenses i used the most were the 18-200 and 50mm.

I strongly suggest something great in low light and light (in weight) and a nice walking around lens for those hikes where you don't want to juggle switching between lenses.

it's really tough to not take a good pic there.

What island(s) are you going to?
Click to expand...

As I said above...Maui!

VirtualRain said:
As I mentioned in the other related thread, I'd highly recommend a Circular Polarizing filter for any trip to sunny locations, particularly tropical island destinations. A Cir. Pol. filter will really cut down on reflections off water, plants, and cut atmospheric haze providing significantly enhanced saturation to those lovely blue and green colors you will undoubtedly capture.

As for lenses, if you can somehow justify getting Canon's 17-55 f2.8 lens, you won't regret it. It constantly amazes me with the detail it captures, the color, and it's low light ability. If I could only take one lens, that would be the one. Other than that, a telephoto can come in handy... I hear the 55-250 compliments the kit lens nicely.
Click to expand...


Do you have any filters in specific that you'd recommend?
 
MacAztec said:
I have not been to Hawaii before. We're going to Maui.



As I said above...Maui!




Do you have any filters in specific that you'd recommend?
Click to expand...

Maui is my personal favourite. It's got it all... from great resorts and beaches, to quaint towns with cool shops, bars and restaurants, to great scenery and activities. Make sure you visit Lahaina!

For a circular polarizer, many people recommend B+W. Maxsaver.net seems to be a popular place to buy, for a fraction of the cost of other etailers. They are based in HK so it can take a week to 10 days to receive your order, but shipping is free, and I've ordered twice and feel confident in recommending them.

Be sure to share some of your photos when you get back. :)
 
VirtualRain said:
Maui is my personal favourite. It's got it all... from great resorts and beaches, to quaint towns with cool shops, bars and restaurants, to great scenery and activities. Make sure you visit Lahaina!

For a circular polarizer, many people recommend B+W. Maxsaver.net seems to be a popular place to buy, for a fraction of the cost of other etailers. They are based in HK so it can take a week to 10 days to receive your order, but shipping is free, and I've ordered twice and feel confident in recommending them.

Be sure to share some of your photos when you get back. :)
Click to expand...

Great. I've read some comments that people say you should buy a the largest size filters, and just get step up mounts for your lenses, so that you only need to buy one filter for all your lenses. Do you agree?

Also, I'm looking at a CPF from Sunpak, B+W, and Tiffen. The B+W is $90+, while the others are <$30. Is it that much better for the B+W?
 
I also shoot with a T2i, and here is my lens setup:
  • 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
  • 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
  • 50mm f/1.4 USM
  • 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
Not counting the prime lens, I use the wide angle lens 20% of the time, the general purpose lens 50% of the time, and the telephoto 30% of the time. Because of this I find it difficult to recommend a single lens. I tend to agree with the previous posters that a wide angle such as the Canon 10-22mm or the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 wide angle would be good choices for taking in all the scenery. Combine either of these with a tripod for long exposures, and you would have a great setup for capturing waterfalls and the surrounding foliage. If you get the 10-22mm however, be sure to run your keeper photos through Digital Photo Professional or DxO Optics to remove chromatic aberration from the corners.

Prior to getting the 70-200mm lens, I used a 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM lens. While it is great for travel because of its small size, I was dissatisfied with its performance in lower light compared to the 70-200mm. I'm looking to sell it for $800 with lens caps and a Pearstone lens hood if anyone is interested. It is cosmetically and mechanically in great shape.

Last but not least, here is a good site with detailed circular polarizer reviews. I haven't used one yet but am thinking about picking one up.
 
OK, if you haven't been to Hawaii, just be aware that personal property theft is pretty rampant. I'm certainly not bashing Hawaii, I've been there 5 times now, but you should be forewarned about this.

I would not leave anything in the rental car, ever. All it takes is a few minutes away and there's a good possibility of the window being smashed and the trunk being popped. In fact, I left the windows down and doors unlocked most of the time. Keep your stuff with you at all times, don't leave it unattended, ever.

So, with that out of the way...

Hawaii is totally easy to take stunning shots. You'll be really happy with the results.

Do remember, though, that you can be in a very humid/rainy, sandy and windy environment. Do you really want to be mucking around with lens changes instead of seeing the island?

If you're there for long enough, you may consider just exploring first (Maui isn't all that big), taking some shots, then returning later to take more shots of the areas that caught your eye.

For Maui, I recommend driving to Hana. I also liked the area to the south of Makena, drive to the end of the road. Both times I've tried to get to Mt. Haleakala I've been stopped due to snow (I generally visit in January).

You'll have a blast!
 
VirtualRain said:
Make sure you visit Lahaina!
Click to expand...

Slightly off-topic from the lens discussion, but yes, definitely visit Lahaina. The banyan tree is amazing, and if you go on a weekend you can stroll the market underneath it. There are lots of nice shops, restaurants, and bars along Front Street. You can also board a charter boat to Lanai for a day trip (and it is WELL worth it; try Trilogy tours if you are interested). The Maui Swiss Cafe, on Front Street (the southern end) is a great little creperie run by a very nice Swiss couple. And if you like Hawaiian food, definitely go to Aloha Mixed Plate on Front Street. It's a low-key place with plastic tables and chairs and food served on paper plates, but their plate lunch is great. Oh, and get some shave ice.

Ooooh, now I'm dreaming of lau lau, kalua pork, lomi lomi salmon, haupia...

Man, I love Hawaii.
 
MacAztec said:
Also, I'm looking at a CPF from Sunpak, B+W, and Tiffen. The B+W is $90+, while the others are <$30. Is it that much better for the B+W?
Click to expand...

I'm no expert on filters, except to say that amongst the vocal online community, B+W appears to be the brand of choice. Their KSM filters are particularly highly regarded as they are all brass/glass (no aluminum), are weather sealed, and have (apparently) superior coatings. The bonus with maxsaver.net is that the KSM filters don't cost much more than the regular MRC multi-coated variety.

You can definitely buy a big filter and use step up rings. If you plan to upgrade your kit lens in the near future, I would probably opt for a filter sized to fit the new lens, and a step up ring for your current lens in the interim. But, if you plan to keep the kit lens for awhile, just buy a filter designed for it.

In my case, I have two lenses that use 77mm filters and one with 67mm... so while I could have used a step up ring for the smaller one, I opted to buy a second filter so I don't have to worry about swapping the filter back and forth. When I was recently in the Caribbean, the cir. pol. filters were pretty much permanently attached to my walk around lens (17-55) and my telephoto (70-300). I didn't use my 10-22 that much (I find 17mm wide enough for most landscapes)... and using a cir. pol. on that can be hit and miss due to the ridiculous field of view that almost ensures a part of the image is not benefiting from the polarization due to the angle with the sun.

jabbott said:
I tend to agree with the previous posters that a wide angle such as the Canon 10-22mm or the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 wide angle would be good choices for taking in all the scenery.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm not doing it right, but I don't find the wide-end of the 10-22 all that useful for landscape photography. It's so wide that the resulting image usually includes too much sky, foreground, and stuff that I don't want in my image (tourists, cars, buildings, etc.) that I end up cropping down anyway. I find the wide end of my 17-55 much more suitable for landscapes and scenic shots. Where I find the 10-22 interesting is in photographing large objects or monuments up close... so you can get close enough to get those tourists, cars, and extraneous things out of the frame while still capturing your monstrous subject.

The bottom line for me is that the 10-22mm in my kit gets used only in very limited circumstances. However, I can definitely understand if your other walk-around lens is a 24-70 on a crop, then you would need the 10-22 a lot more often. In fact, so often that this combo would be a serious PITA for me on a crop.
 
lenses

get yourself a 50mm 1.4 and a 100-300 with a doubler. That should cover just about everything.
:)

Oh ya and a polarizer filter.... Dont leave home without it.
 
VirtualRain said:
Maybe I'm not doing it right, but I don't find the wide-end of the 10-22 all that useful for landscape photography. It's so wide that the resulting image usually includes too much sky, foreground, and stuff that I don't want in my image (tourists, cars, buildings, etc.) that I end up cropping down anyway. I find the wide end of my 17-55 much more suitable for landscapes and scenic shots. Where I find the 10-22 interesting is in photographing large objects or monuments up close... so you can get close enough to get those tourists, cars, and extraneous things out of the frame while still capturing your monstrous subject.

The bottom line for me is that the 10-22mm in my kit gets used only in very limited circumstances. However, I can definitely understand if your other walk-around lens is a 24-70 on a crop, then you would need the 10-22 a lot more often. In fact, so often that this combo would be a serious PITA for me on a crop.
Click to expand...

I recall seeing one of your 10-22mm landscape shots (last year I believe) and it was stunning. While I agree that the 10-22mm doesn't always work for landscapes, there are definitely times when it is useful. Last weekend I was in the Collegiate Peaks area of Colorado (photos here) and the 10-22mm was helpful for getting tall Aspens into the frame, as well as closeups of buildings. The 24-70mm was good for most other scenarios.
 
jabbott said:
I recall seeing one of your 10-22mm landscape shots (last year I believe) and it was stunning. While I agree that the 10-22mm doesn't always work for landscapes, there are definitely times when it is useful. Last weekend I was in the Collegiate Peaks area of Colorado (photos here) and the 10-22mm was helpful for getting tall Aspens into the frame, as well as closeups of buildings. The 24-70mm was good for most other scenarios.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Nice shots in that Colorado set... Photo 5 is a typical example of what I end up with when shooting Landscapes and illustrates the point I was trying to make above. Photo 33 and 35 are how I tend to use it more so now. BTW, I love image 4... Beautiful!
 
Thanks for all the advice.

If I weren't to buy a new lens, and just go with the kit lens, would the shots still be pretty great?

If I did this, what filter(s) should I get (I'm already going to order a CPF)...

You guys have really helped me out!
 
At least buy a nifty 50 lens. 50mm lens / $100 bucks and will let you take some WICKED portraits and some low light night stuff. Torchlit dinners, volcanos, sunsets, a cheap prime could get you some good pics :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back