Lens choices for trip to Galapagos

[hoovermd 0]

We are headed to the Galapagos at the end of October on the Peter Hughes boat.

After the trip we are taking a short trip to Machu Picchu so we will be needing gear for both land and sea.

 

Typically we simply pack it all but since this is not exactly a warm weather trip I'm afraid I can't do that

I'm also packing 2 sets of SS backplates

 

we've spent some time collecting a nice set of glass but I've not been to either of the locations before and am paralyzed by the options.

So, the question is this... if you had to select from the options below what would you pack?

 

There are two camera bodies (both Canon 5Ds) and it is a given that the wife will shoot her 100MM macro and ring flash. For the second body the choice is most likely the new Canon 16-35mm zoom.

 

First question is should I pack two Substrobe 200s for my WA? I'm leaning yes unless someone can convince me that I don't want to be pushing a rig like this thru the currents.

 

For land we also have available (all CANON)

 

EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM - definitely packing this

EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM- definitely packing this

 

Other candidates:

 

EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM (this is also useable UW albeit in a limited fashion)

EF 14mm f/2.8L USM (this is also useable UW)

EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

EF 135mm f/2L USM

EF 300mm f/4L IS USM

Extender EF 1.4x II

 

What would you pack assuming that there are two people hiking about the ruins after the dive trip?

 

Also, would it be worth having a EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM in lieu of any of these?

[ReefRoamer 1]

Having been to both, I confirm your choices of 16-35 and 100 macro for the WA and macro UW shots. Definitely take two strobes for the wide stuff. The current shouldn't be that difficult and you typically won't have long swims. The surge can get a little hairy.

 

For Machu Picchu, the choice is more problematic. On my trip, in 2000, I carried a Canon film SLR and used only my Canon 28-200 zoom. Not the sharpest lens available, but acceptable for me considering its zoom range, size and weight. I wish there were was an L version. Today, on my 20D, I'd probably take the EFS 17-85 and perhaps a 70-200. The 17-85 (or 28-200) would get the most use by far, since there really aren't that many long tele needs. You'll be shooting wide to medium most of the time on land. I never felt I was lacking at 200mm. The 100-400 is too big and heavy considering the few opportunities you'll have to use it beyond 200, IMHO. Take a polarizing filter for better sky. Great trip, so hope you have a good time!