The Heavy Lens Debate

Before each photography tour I lead, I send out a pdf format eBooklet with information about the tour, and I include a list of recommended camera equipment. If the tour is largely focused on bird or wildlife photography, long lenses are obviously ideal. But so often, clients will still ask if they should bring their heavy glass -- usually a 500mm f/4 or a 600mm f/4.

I know exactly what they are saying. They really don’t want the burden of carrying such a big lens and dealing with the weight, the hassle of airport security. and hoping there is enough space in the overhead compartment on the plane for their gear. The nightmare for photographers when traveling is that airline personnel could insist on checking in this heavy, expensive equipment.

On the other hand, these lenses are super expensive. What was the point of paying all that money and not using them?

So, when I’m asked whether the client should bring a large lens, I feel like I’m between a rock and a hard place. It’s hard for me to give an intelligent answer since every photographer thinks and shoots differently. For this article, though, I thought I would summarize my thoughts on the subect, and I’m hoping you may find this helpful.

The unexpected

On my recent winter photo tour to Iceland, if a client had asked me if a 700mm focal length was needed, I would have said -- knowing he or she was essentially asking permission to leave such a large lens at home -- no, it’s not. Go ahead and leave it home.

And yet the picture below of frost on a black sand beach made such a pretty pattern that I had to photograph it. I filled the frame with the graphic design using a 500mm focal length plus a 1.4x teleconverter giving me 700mm of focal length. I had been to this beach before but had never seen frost like this interwoven with ripples in black sand. Had I not brought the right equipment to Iceland, I would have missed this shot.

What you have to debate in your mind before any trip are these things:

1. How important is it that I don’t miss photo opportunities?

2. How much weight can I physically carry before photography isn’t fun any more? In other words, how much will it hurt to carry heavy gear and is it worth the pain?

3. Will I be on any small planes where weight is a safety issue?

4. Can I replace heavy glass with lenses that have the same focal length but weigh a lot less?

This last question is important because the answer is yes. But this requires some serious compromises when it comes to speed and ISO.

Pros and Cons of long lenses

In 2007, I bought a Canon 500mm f/4 instead of the 600mm f/4. I debated between the two for several weeks, and in the end chose the smaller lens (still quite heavy, of course) primarily because it was a lot easier to carry, and it fit into a case that didn’t draw attention. Airline checkin personnel were less likely to weigh it. I figured the loss of 100mm of focal length could be made up by a teleconverter.

I sold the lens last year because I’d developed lower back problems from the heavy gear I had carried for many decades. I replaced it with the new Canon 100-500mm lens which I’ve come to love. Here are my conclusions in compar- ing the two types of lenses, especially when it comes to traveling. Whether you travel internationally or to a nearby national park, packing and carrying photo equipment requires careful thought.

The only advantage of heavy glass, specifically the 500mm f/4 and 600mm f/4 lenses, is that they are fast. This means the large f/4 aperture lets in a lot of light. More light, in turn, gives the photographer the ability to use fast shutter speeds with relatively low ISO settings in reduced lighting conditions.

The disadvantages of the super telephotos are significant. They are very heavy and, for many people, it’s hard to handhold such weight as you’re watching for a bird to fly or an animal to run. A sturdy tripod is required to stabilize these large lenses, and this becomes another