Grand Canyon At Thanksgiving

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Tony Graber - 17 Oct 2004 08:27 GMT

I am planning a visit to the Grand Canyon the day after Thanksgiving,
this year. This is my second trip to the Grand Canyon and want to thank
many of you for the helpful suggestions that were given the last time I
posted about going to the Grand Canyon. I also have a new dslr and have
some questions about that, as well.

For this trip, I will have 2 sunsets and 3 sunrises. I would like to
make full use of the situation and take photos at each. The last time,
I stayed along the South Rim for all of my shots and did not venture
down any of the trails for photos.

I have two topics for discussion. First, which trails are good for
taking pictures at sunrise and which are good for sunset, or both? How
far will I have to hike down any of these trails to get where I need to
be for good opportunities for photos? I would prefer not to hike more
than 30 minutes down into the Canyon to find the desired location, so
anything long may not be doable. Is this possible?

Second topic of discussion concerns my recent purchase of a Canon
Digital Rebel with an 18-55mm lense. My question is, what types of
lenses (and sizes) would be appropriate for taking good photos of
scenary as vast as at the Grand Canyon? If wide angle, how wide? Why?
If zoom, how much is appropriate and why? I have been looking at a
Tamron lense 28-200mm and wonder if it might fit my purposes.

Iam a novice with slr and dslr cameras and want to learn. I would love
any feedback, suggestions, opinions, on the above topics and questions.

Thank you,

Tony D. Graber
Tucson, Arizona

Reply to this Message

Bill Hilton - 17 Oct 2004 17:14 GMT

>From: Tony Graber books64@yahoo.com

>I am planning a visit to the Grand Canyon the day after Thanksgiving
>
>which trails are good for
>taking pictures at sunrise and which are good for sunset, or both?

If you mean trails below the rim then there are only two maintained ones,
Bright Angel and Kaibab (there are also six other non-maintained south rim
trails that were used by miners etc 100 years ago but you shouldn't try those
until you have experience on the basic ones ... I've hiked for three days on
some of these without seeing anyone at all so if you get into trouble on them
you are really in trouble).

Bright Angel is in a drainage with cliffs extending out on two sides blocking
the early and late sun for the first several miles below the rim, so it's not a
good choice for sunrise/sunset shots. This trailhead is near the main complex
of hotels, a couple hundred yards west of El Tovar Lodge.

Kaibab is a few miles to the east. It starts in a drainage but quickly (half a
mile or so) becomes a ridge trail with drop offs on both sides, meaning you can
shoot into the sun or with the sun at your back either early or late. For this
reason Kaibab is by far the best choice for sunrise/sunset shots from a trail.

>How far will I have to hike down any of these trails to get where I need
>to be for good opportunities for photos? I would prefer not to hike more
>than 30 minutes down into the Canyon ... Is this possible?

There are seven steep switchbacks at the head of Kaibab, then the trail
traverses to your right for maybe half a mile as it goes under the cliff face
of Yaki Point. Once you reach the end of this you suddenly have a great view
of the canyon upstream for about 20 miles. This first point is nick-named "Oh
My Gosh!" point and when you reach it you'll understand why. From here on down
you'll have numerous scenic opportunities in all directions, depending on the
light.

If you can extend your 30 minutes a bit to say 45-60 minutes you should be able
to easily make Cedar Ridge, which is an open area about 1.5 miles from the rim
with a pit toilet and hitching post for mule riders. You can hike straight out
the point toward the north rim (off the trail) and shoot on either side. This
is a great area early and late. Here's a photo I took from Mather Point that
shows Cedar Ridge, which is on the main ridge-line running across the frame
about 1/3 the way in from the right edge of the image where the steep part
flattens out a bit ...
http://members.aol.com/canyonimge/gallery/image_pages/cc/i_clearingstorm_gc.htm
...

A pack mule train will start down from the top of the trail at sunrise and if
you're below it and get set up you can often get a nice shot of the pack train
in the foreground with the canyon opening up behind. Also there are typically
two or three mule trains coming UP the canyon with over-night guests from
Phantom Ranch and they reach Cedar Ridge at about 11 AM or so.

One problem is getting to the trailhead early enough to start down early enough
to catch the actual sunrise since the trailhead parking lot is not open unless
you have a camping permit for the inner canyon. The hiker's shuttle bus to
Kaibab and Yaki Point usually gets there an hour before sunrise and you NEED to
be on that first bus to get far enough down the trail for sunrise. Check the
bus schedule when you arrive at the park, you can pick it up at the entrance.
You can also have someone drive you close to the trailhead and walk in earlier
if you're traveling with someone.

Also, if there is an early snow storm the upper section might be icy and
slippery early in the AM so be careful. Check it out the afternoon before.
You can rent step-in crampons at the General Store for the first set of
switchbacks, if need be.

If you're going to Cedar Ridge take food and water and plan on taking twice as
long to hike back up as you took to hike down.

>My question is, what types of
>lenses (and sizes) would be appropriate for taking good photos of
>scenary as vast as at the Grand Canyon? If wide angle, how wide? Why?
> If zoom, how much is appropriate and why? I have been looking at a
>Tamron lense 28-200mm and wonder if it might fit my purposes.

Many pros who shoot for Arizona Highways (Dykinga, Ladd, Muench, etc) prefer
short to medium telephotos to compress the distances and isolate well-lit
features. The problem with a wide angle is that the other side of the canyon
is about 12 miles away and there's often a bit of haze, so a lot of wide angle
shots look dull. You can usually get far enough back from objects on THIS side
of the canyon to hold sufficient depth of field to get this side and the other
side in focus with some compression with shorter telephotos. If I could only
take one lens for 35 mm it would probably be a 70-200. If I could take two I'd
make the second one a 17-35 or 28-70, probably the 17-35.

If you really want to shoot wide angle I'd guess your 18-55 with the dRebel
would be fine, especially since the 55mm has a 35 mm field of view equivalent
to 88 mm. The shot I linked to above was taken with a focal length roughly
equivalent to this.

> I have been looking at a
>Tamron lense 28-200mm and wonder if it might fit my purposes.

Should be fine. You probably don't want to carry more than two lenses.

Bill

Reply to this Message

Martin Djernæs - 17 Oct 2004 18:58 GMT

> ...

As always a fountain of amazing information Bill. We all thank you for
the time you spend writing really good answers to people.

Martin

Reply to this Message

Kevin Butz - 29 Nov 2004 19:15 GMT

Couldn't agree more. Thinking about heading down to the canyon late this
week. All this info couldn't have come at a better time.

kwhiner

> > ...
>
> As always a fountain of amazing information Bill. We all thank you for the
> time you spend writing really good answers to people.
>
> Martin

Reply to this Message

David Emery - 18 Oct 2004 00:30 GMT

First, don't forget that the Digital Rebel has a 1.6x multiplier
on focal lengh. So that 28-200 is actually the equivalent of a
44-320 lens.

The EF-S lens with the Digital Rebel (based on my unscientific
tests photographing a brick wall:-), is a a bit funky at the
lowest focal length. From about 22mm or so it's surprisingly
good for an inexpensive lens.

My second lens was a 75-300 IS, and I've added a 28mm f2.8, which
was cheap and is very good for low light/indoor situations.
(That's about a 44mm lens in standard 35mm, close enough to
the standard 55mm that it's good enough for WYSIWYG shots.)

Canon has announced some new lenses to the EF-S line. These
lenses are specifically for Canon digital cameras, and take
advantage of the smaller imager (the same way the EF-S lens
that comes with the camera.) The 75-300 IS lens is a bit 'long
in the tooth', and my guess is that there'll be a replacement
for it soon. But it's a good second lens, and the IS gives you
about 2 stops of added sharpness without a tripod. You do
pay a price in weight and size for the image stabilizer, though.
(I call it my "big honkin' lens" :-)

I have a bit of a gap between 40mm and 75mm (equivalent to 70-120
in a standard 35mm camera), but that's a range that I don't
miss much in outdoor photos.

Don't forget your Grad ND and Polarizer filters! And you might
want to consider a color intensifier filter.

dave

>>From: Tony Graber books64@yahoo.com

...

>>My question is, what types of
>>lenses (and sizes) would be appropriate for taking good photos of
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
> Bill

Reply to this Message

Roger Whitehead - 18 Oct 2004 02:23 GMT

> So that 28-200 is actually the equivalent of a
> 44-320 lens.

.. on a 35mm film camera, that is.

Roger

Reply to this Message

Tony Graber - 19 Oct 2004 18:43 GMT

Thanks, Bill. As always, you are a fountain of information and I
appreciate it that you share. :)

I do have a follow-up question, though, about lenses. You mentioned
that if you could only take two lenses, one of them would be a 70-200.
I am looking at a 28-200, as previously noted, as well as other 70-200
and 75-300 lenses. What is the advantage (or disadvantage) of going
with a 28-200 lense, as opposed to a 70-200 lense?

>>From: Tony Graber books64@yahoo.com
>
[quoted text clipped - 93 lines]
>
> Bill

Reply to this Message

Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) - 20 Oct 2004 01:40 GMT

> Thanks, Bill. As always, you are a fountain of information and I
> appreciate it that you share. :)
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> 75-300 lenses. What is the advantage (or disadvantage) of going with a
> 28-200 lense, as opposed to a 70-200 lense?

Hi
The 70-200 lens Bill uses is an f/2.8 L IS lens and very sharp.
In general, the larger the zoom range, the more compromises
that need to be made in the design. A factor of 3 is about
the maximum without compromising too much on image
quality and maximum aperture. That is why you see most
zooms limited to the approximately 3x range. The 28-200
is a 7x range. I have not looked up the specific quality
of that lens but I would be surprised if it came
close to the 70-200 L IS lens. The 70-200 is next
on my list to get.

Roger

Reply to this Message

Tony Graber - 20 Oct 2004 09:01 GMT

Wow! Thank you! I did not realize that there is a problem with a factor
greater than 3 compromising image quality and maximum aperature. I went
to B&N today to try to answer my own question and went through a dozen
or so-called "how-to's" without finding anything remotely close to the
short answer that you have given. Thank you very much!

Tony Graber

>> Thanks, Bill. As always, you are a fountain of information and I
>> appreciate it that you share. :)
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
> Roger

Reply to this Message

Bill Hilton - 20 Oct 2004 16:46 GMT

>From: Tony Graber books64@cox.net

>Thanks, Bill. As always, you are a fountain of information and I
>appreciate it that you share. :)

No problem Tony (and Martin), I've received a lot of good info from folks on
this NG (like Roger C, who even took me to his favorite mountain goat photo
spot) so don't mind helping out when it's an area I know well.

>I do have a follow-up question, though, about lenses. You mentioned
>that if you could only take two lenses, one of them would be a 70-200.

Only because I happen to have it and it covers a useful focal range, there's no
single magic lens for the Grand Canyon. I used to take five medium format
lenses with me on my GC hikes and the 70-200 covers two of them, the 28-70
covers the other three so that's why I said I'd take those two lenses if
carrying 35 mm (though I rarely actually use 35 mm in there, except for river
float trips).

>I am looking at a 28-200, as previously noted, as well as other 70-200
>and 75-300 lenses. What is the advantage (or disadvantage) of going
>with a 28-200 lense, as opposed to a 70-200 lense?

The 28-200 on a 35 mm body will give you a wide range of focal lengths, which
is nice for the GC. As Roger pointed out, a 7x zoom won't have the optical
quality of a 2x or 3x but it might be OK for your requirements, especially if
you can stop down to f/8 or so (bring a tripod). For sure it will cost a lot
less and weigh a lot less than the f/2.8 "L" zooms I mentioned. There are some
pretty decent 4x zooms too, the Canon 75-300 IS isn't bad at all and has IS,
and the 100-400 IS is also a good lens for such a wide focal range.

Also, note that your dRebel has a sensor smaller than 35mm so in effect the
28-200 has the field of view of a 45 - 320 mm lens for 35mm. You might want
something a bit wider than 45 mm equiv, though you can get along fine with this
range for the most part in the Canyon. I think you said you already have the
18-55 mm (or something like that), which should cover the wide angle shots
nicely.

Two other things worth mentioning ... the Canyon trails are usually dusty
(unless it just rained or snowed) and if you have to change lenses a lot you'll
probably have dust on the sensor pretty quick, so a zoom with a wider focal
range means you'll have to change the lens less often, which is good. This
dust problem is one of the curses of digital.

Also, should have mentioned it before but I always carry my photo gear in a
water-proof bag to keep the dust and sweat out. I use the so-called "dry bags"
used for river running, the ones that would hold a loaf of bread are about the
right size. For smaller lenses you can double bag them in zip-locks and be
fine. If you're going to wear the camera around your neck (which is fine for a
shorter hike) I'd suggest one of the gallon or two-gallon sized zip lock bags
to at least wrap around the camera while on your neck to keep the dust down.

Have a good trip ... I hear they are getting over a foot of snow near the
Canyon this week, though maybe a bit higher than the rim area.

Bill

Reply to this Message

Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) - 21 Oct 2004 01:10 GMT

> Two other things worth mentioning ... the Canyon trails are usually dusty
> (unless it just rained or snowed) and if you have to change lenses a lot you'll
> probably have dust on the sensor pretty quick, so a zoom with a wider focal
> range means you'll have to change the lens less often, which is good. This
> dust problem is one of the curses of digital.

Something of note that came up in the rec.photo.digital
newsgroup is that some zooms can actually pump air (and dust).
For example, I tested my 100-400 L IS and it really pumps
a lot of air with the push-pull zoom design. So which is better:
a zoom constantly pumping air and dust into the camera,
or fixed sealed lenses that you change occasionally?

On a recent trip to Alaska, I used mostly fixed lenses, but
constantly changed lenses and telextenders. I never had one
dust spec appear on my over 5,000 images. I use a
method that minimizes possible dust: I remove the rear lens
cap of the lens going on, and hold it in one hand. The camera
is hanging from my neck or on a tripod so I don't have to
handle it. As I remove the lens on the camera, I slide the
new lens into place, exposing the inside for only a couple of
seconds. I do get dust, but it seems rare, every few thousand
images. For big lenses, like the 500 f/4 which is on the tripod,
I remove the lens caps for the telextender, remove the camera
and quickly slide the TC into place, then put the TC+camera
on the big lens. Some people recommend turning off the camera
to change lenses, but I really do not see the need as the
sensor is behind the shutter. The concern is dust gets into the
camera during a lens change, then during an exposure, dust
gets on the sensor because mirror slap and the shutter stirs up
the dust.

Roger

Reply to this Message