Galapagos Photography
I went to the Galapagos with some friends and family in July 2008; this is a report
on what worked for me in terms of taking pictures. If you're going and you're interested in photography, maybe this can help.
The Pictures
The most important thing: here's how the picture came out, separated
into three galleries of about 30 photos each. Click to see them.
Lens Selection
What lens(es) to bring? For my full-frame Canon 5D, I brought the
17-40, 24-105, 70-200 f4 IS, and 100-400mm. Interestingly, all four
of these had been recommended in different forums as the "perfect lens
for Galapagos" or "the one I used for 95% of my shots." How did it
work for me? Well, here's a histogram of the percentage of my photos
at different focal lengths and the lenses that cover those lengths
(not necessarily the lenses actually used for the shots):
In summary, here is my preference for lenses (for a full-frame sensor):
- 100-400mm (84% of my shots). Excellent range, but
somewhat soft at the long end (better if stopped down to
7.2). Possible alternatives: If you can handle the weight, the Sigma
120-300mm f/2.8 with a teleconverter and a monopod might be ideal:
sharper and faster (but no IS). Or the 70-300mm IS if you are on a
budget. Or 300 f/4 prime. On an unlimited budget, a 400mm f/4 or 300mm
f/2.8 prime with teleconverters would be great. Renowned bird photographer Arthur Morris went to Galapagos
about the same time as me, and took the 400mm f/4 DO. He got great results as he
always does, but the close focus distance of 3.5 meters meant he had
to fuss with extension tubes when he wanted to get closer (and of
course teleconverters when he wanted more zoom). And he didn't have
the 100-399mm range. On his previous trip he lugged the
500mm f/4 and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS.)
- 17-40mm f/4 (14%). Possible alternative: 16-35mm. I
could have left the 24-105 home; usually 24mm isn't wide enough and 105
isn't long enough. Between the 100-400 and the 17-40, I've got 98% of
my shots covered; you could easily stop there.
- 15mm fisheye or Sigma 12-24 mm (0%). Right before I left,
my friend and Galapagos expert Frank Sulloway recommended a 15mm
fisheye (he says the Sigma is better than the Canon). Fisheyes had
never appealed to me before, and I didn't have time to get one, but in
retrospect I really think Frank was right. 9% of my pictures were at
17mm; for some of them I wanted to go wider. If I could do it over and
bring just three lenses, the third would be either a 15mm fisheye or
the Sigma 12-24mm (the widest lens you can get on a full-frame SLR
with a standard mount). Frank also gave good advice with "I probably
use my 16-35 mm lens and my 70-300 mm lens more than any of the other
lenses."
- 70-200mm f/4 IS (21%). Yes, 21% of my shots fell into the
range of this lens, but most of those were actually taken with the
100-400. The days I did hike with the 70-200 I did appreciate that it
was lighter, but I could easily have done without it. But if you
go with a 300mm or 400mm prime for your long lens, then this
(or the f/2.8 version) would be ideal as a complement.
There are rough equivalents of these lenses for any camera system.
For a Canon crop sensor camera I would recommend:
- 100-400mm or 70-300mm IS
- 10-22mm or 10-20mm
- (optional) 17-55mm f/2.8 or 18-55mm kit lens
Other Equipment
Every day (usually twice a day) you transfer to shore in dinghys.
Nobody had any mishaps getting gear wet, but I still think it is a
good idea to pack gear in a dry sack. I also felt that a photo vest
makes more sense than a bag; easier access to lenses etc. when they're
in your front pocket rather than on your back. Others
agree. So leave your bag on the boat, wrap your gear in your vest,
put it in your dry sack, and when you are safely and dryly on shore,
put on the vest.
Leave your tripod home; the few who brought tripods on our trip abandoned them after the first day.
Several people used monopods to good effect, both as a camera support and as a walking stick.
Don't forget to bring something to clean your sensor. If you change lenses you will get spots on your sensor.
Flash photography of animals is not allowed, so don't bother with a flash.
You'll probably want something for underwater pictures while
snorkling. I used the underwater
housing for the Canon G9; several people used waterproof cameras
such as the Pentax
W30 or the Olympus
770SW. The housings seem to work better.
Other Sources of Advice
- Art Morris (famous bird photographer) has trip reports from 2005 (part 2), 2006, 2007, and 2008 along with an excellent gallery.
- A Traveler's Guide to the Galapagos Islands: this book is by the owner of the tour company we went with, but it is objective and informative.
- Ecuador, there and back again: great photos, along with commentary on the trip.
- A Photographer's Guide to the Galapagos by Phil Greenspun, founder of photo.net.
- What lenses to bring by Thom Hogan, famous nature photographer. Conclusion: 80-400, 24-120, 17-35. Best rational for a longer lens than 70-200: "It's not a matter of not being able to get close to the animals. Instead, it's a matter of getting close to the animals when they're doing something you want to capture on film."
- Galapagos trip and photography equipment by Fredo Durand, MIT professor and computational photographer. With extensive gallery. Brought 500 f/4 and 100-400.
- Large gallery at Galapagos Conservancy. Very nice, but they have mis-labelled a red-footed booby as a blue-footed (in a picture that does not show the feet, obviously) and a hybrid iguana as a land iguana. A month ago I would have had no clue as to the differences, and now I am outraged at the error!
Peter Norvig
