Norweigen fjords which lens to take

realspeed

realspeed

Messages
7,985
Name
Bazza
Edit My Images
Yes
My wife and I are booked to go on the Norweigen fjords next year around June time. I was wondering which lens to take with my Nikon D810. I have a choice of 50mm f1.4, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 0r the heavy 80-40 f 4.5 to f5.6. my camcorder will also be taken. Also considering a UV filter?????
At the moment it looks like the 24-70 and the 70-200 but anyone already having been may be able to advise better.

Thanks for any tip in advance
 
Last edited:
Whatever you decide (and surely the ship'll take the weight?), let's hope at least that the quality of your product will be commensurate with the monetary value of your equipment.
 
Rog
Thanks for getting back to me. I can see where your comming from and understand.

my first priority is to capture scenes of where I have been as reminders in the future. I know most on here bash on about doing things that are technically correct but that doesn't bother me. As long as I am happy with what I take that is all that matters.
I am not out to produce the perfect photo that I want published.
If I was a working pro that would be a different matter, but for me it is a hobby I have spent a little bit of money on.
 
Best i can say is take the lot you are on a cruise it won’t sink the ship
 
24-70-200 and the fast 50. TBH, I'd probably take a UWA as well since I have one.
 
We went a couple of years ago.
To go with my crop X-T2 I took the 10.24 and 18.55. More than enough for me.
The biggest drawback I found was that unless you pay through the nose to go on the excursions you don't get a lot of chance to photograph the actual fjords.
They aim to have the ship docked before breakfast and it leaves at the end of the day just before dinner.
The fjords are big. I mean big. When you are on the boat they almost overwhelm you with their size. I didn't come away with many decent shots of the fjords themselves.

Who are you going with? Not Fred Olson is it?
 
There was a write-up in this quarters Canon publication, they took 24/70 and 70/200 (2.8 & 4.0 respectively) to Iceland and concluded they had all the kit they needed. I only skimmed it, I'll have another in-depth read to see if there was anything else worth mentioning.

Matt
 
Last edited:
Don't use a UV filter if photographing the Northern Lights, as it can cause a Newton's Rings type effect to appear in the centre of your image. You should be able to use the search facility on this forum to find a thread about this (probably using Aurora or Northern Lights as search words), which includes some example spoilt images. (y)
 
Last edited:
mickledore said:
We went a couple of years ago.
To go with my crop X-T2 I took the 10.24 and 18.55. More than enough for me.
The biggest drawback I found was that unless you pay through the nose to go on the excursions you don't get a lot of chance to photograph the actual fjords.
They aim to have the ship docked before breakfast and it leaves at the end of the day just before dinner.
The fjords are big. I mean big. When you are on the boat they almost overwhelm you with their size. I didn't come away with many decent shots of the fjords themselves.

Who are you going with? Not Fred Olson is it?
Click to expand...


No not with them
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


And the northern lights are earlier in the year MR B around March time I believe. That would be another trip

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Thank you Matt and Nod
. At the moment it looks like the Nikons 24-70 mm f2.8 and the 70-200mm f2.8, may even take the 50mm f1.4 . That should suffice then. of course not forgetting the camcorder. I have a 12-24mm f1.4g DX lens so that is a thought, will have to check it out on the Nikon D810 which recognises DX lenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry not having replied earlier. Yesterday had a tooth out and today fitted a dashcam on my wifes car so just got back onto the computer
 
Last edited:
I went a few years ago with my Sigma DPMs - so the FF equivalent of 28mm, 45mm, and 75mm plus a DSLR with a 70-300.

I mainly used the 28 and 45 equivalents and hardly used the 70-300.

I shot panos to go wider.

If it's a cruise with two sittings then typically they board and depart port not long before the first sitting. If you want to stay up top and photograph the departure then second sitting or free dining is better. It can get breezey up top on a moving ship - so photographing looking back across the stern may be more sheltered. Morning arrivals tended to be quieter and more still but gloomier.

A cruise has the advantage of allowing you take plenty of kit and gets you from place to place without having to pack and unpack or bother too much about details such as finding food. OTOH you're tied to the routine of the ship and its port timings which limit your opportunities to make the best of the country.

I enjoyed my experience visiting on a cruise ship immensely - but it's made me want to go back and visit Norway in the future - but travel independently.
 
Andew

My wife and i have done several cruises including the Med twice- Caribbean- Baltic and even the river Nile. This will be our first Norway cruise so any information is gratefully received. Our non cruise holidays include the USA twice- Brazil several times-Tunisia- Spain -Brittany- China- Argentina . Now we are retired we have time to see parts of the world, before we were tied down somewhat with our boarding kennels and cattery business.

On our bucket list are Japan- China again parts of the world where the culture is so different and loads of history Canada is also on the list doing the Rockies.
 
Last edited:
Bazza, #1 son lives and works in Norway and we visited there earlier in the year (by train from the UK!). The one thing to bear in mind is that the place is VERY expensive - think 3.50GBP for a 1/2 litre bottle of water - so if you are going to need any photography consumables, cards, batteries, etc, buy them before you get there.
 
When I went several years ago, the wide angle lens was on the majority of the time, so in 35mm terms, 16mm to 105mm would cover it.
 
You'll get some great shots regardless of the lenses you take so I wouldn't worry about it too much, the 24-70/70-200 should cover the landscape stuff easily... a fair amount of which you'll be taking from the ship during the cruising. An UWA is useful in the towns for architecture shots, some of the towns are very photogenic.

Simon
 
simonkit said:
You'll get some great shots regardless of the lenses you take so I wouldn't worry about it too much, the 24-70/70-200 should cover the landscape stuff easily... a fair amount of which you'll be taking from the ship during the cruising. An UWA is useful in the towns for architecture shots, some of the towns are very photogenic.

Simon
Click to expand...


Thanks for the tip. I do have a Nikon 12-24mm f1.4 DX lens . Just tried it out in the back garden with the D810 and it covers a faily wide area. So yes good idea one i will be taking with me

UwD8mge.jpg



For anyone looking, this is a photo just to get some idea of the width this lens covers. to test for future Fjords trip next year
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top