New Zealand trip -what lenses to take?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Stmall

Stmall

Member
Member's gallery
A quick search didn’t show a similar question being asked so looking for advice here please.

My wife and I have a 6 week NZ tour planned and booked. Following the main tourist trail, driving and staying in hotels etc.

it’s not a photo trip per se but I will be looking to use the opportunity to the full. It’s not a birding trip but I will be looking for birding opportunities and we have a couple of nights on Stewart Island with a dedicated trip to Ulva.

So the question is what lenses? We’re from the UK and I can only realistically take a smallish amount of kit. I’ll take the Z9 and the 24-120 which should cover most landscape and general stuff. I can realitonly take one telephoto lens.

I’ve been holding back on the 180-600 (it’s heavier than I want). For wildlife and birds I’m currently using the 500pf.

I am tempted by the 400 f4.5 and TC which gives 2 options. Or the 100-400 plus TC for the range. It’s the same considerations covered in a number of threads. So I’m looking for a specific NZ angle on this. I suspect the landscapes will offer more than the birds much of the time. Would the 100-400 add something if I took that instead of the 500pf? And if I did that would I lose out on the birding shots?

Thanks in anticipation
 
Member's gallery
For a Once in a lifetime trip of such a long duration, I would most certainly prioritize landcape photography in New Zealand. If it were me, I would carry a bag consisting of:

1) Z8/Z9
2) 24-120
3) 100-400 (or 70-200 as I do not have the 100-400) (this is going to be an important focal range for mountain landscapes)
4) 14-24 or 14-30 ( I would buy the 14-24 for the trip)
5) 40 F2 for low light family portraits
6) Filters
7) Tripod
8) MIOPS/Remote Release

It is really not as much as it sounds and is very manageable with a good back pack. I'd be very interested in hearing what you end up taking and seeing any images you are happy to share.
 
Member's gallery
We were in NZ in February. We drove from Queenstown to Twizel to fly fish. I was surprised how limited the ability was to pull off the road for images, so do some research on parks and places to do that.

Will you try Astro there? If so plan a lens for that.

Unless you plan on giving up the 500pf and want to switch to the 400 anyway, I think it will be fine. That and the 24-120 should cover your daytime.

That said, if you wanted to add a lens I would recommend the 14-30 for its ease of travel, unless you have a specific reason for 2.8 on the ultra wide.

And bring one fast lens for nighttime shots.

It's a great place to visit. Highly recommend the Shotover Jet Boat ride if you are near Queenstown.

Shotover - 1.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Stmall said:
A quick search didn’t show a similar question being asked so looking for advice here please.

My wife and I have a 6 week NZ tour planned and booked. Following the main tourist trail, driving and staying in hotels etc.

it’s not a photo trip per se but I will be looking to use the opportunity to the full. It’s not a birding trip but I will be looking for birding opportunities and we have a couple of nights on Stewart Island with a dedicated trip to Ulva.

So the question is what lenses? We’re from the UK and I can only realistically take a smallish amount of kit. I’ll take the Z9 and the 24-120 which should cover most landscape and general stuff. I can realitonly take one telephoto lens.

I’ve been holding back on the 180-600 (it’s heavier than I want). For wildlife and birds I’m currently using the 500pf.

I am tempted by the 400 f4.5 and TC which gives 2 options. Or the 100-400 plus TC for the range. It’s the same considerations covered in a number of threads. So I’m looking for a specific NZ angle on this. I suspect the landscapes will offer more than the birds much of the time. Would the 100-400 add something if I took that instead of the 500pf? And if I did that would I lose out on the birding shots?

Thanks in anticipation
Click to expand...
I did a New Zealand trip somewhat recently back in October 2022 and previously in 2016. Both of my trips were primarily focused on landscape photography, but I also visited Stewart Island/Ulva Island specifically for bird photography.

I took my Nikon f/2.8 trinity (14-24, 24-70 and 70-200), a 105 f/2.8 macro and a 20mm f/1.8 with me for landscape, astro and macro photography. I took my 500mm PF specifically for birding and used it exclusively on Stewart and Ulva Islands. The 400 f4.5 with TC should be a good substitute for the 500 PF, but the 500 PF worked great for me.

New Zealand has been one of my most favorite places to travel to. Enjoy the trip!
 
Member's gallery
I'd take the 500PF. If you're itching for an excuse to buy the 400 4.5/TC then yes that's even better. I've been twice with a DX body and 80-400 and for birds shot it at 400mm 95 percent of the time.
 
Member's gallery
Thanks for all the replies so far.

It seems like I take the 500pf or buy a 100-400 plus the TC to use for both birds and landscapes. But will I need the 200-400 range?

I could get a 70-200 or to save weight the 70-180. But I could also use the 24-120 in DX instead which would save even more weight albeit at a cost to quality.

The 14-30 seems like a definite. And maybe the 50mm 1.8 (though the 40mm 2.0 would save weight).

To minimise weight and cost of new lenses I’m tending towards
14-30
24-120
50mm 1.8
500mm pf

That removes the need for the 400 4.5 but I’m still unsure about getting the 100-400 and TC for the 200-400 range. It’s a lens I’ve been thinking about anyway but the 500 pf has been fine for wildlife and I can’t quite see the advantage generally and I’d lose 100mm of focal length.

I didn’t think the 180-600 made sense and so far no one yet has suggested otherwise.

@BarkingBeansCoffee thanks for the tip about the shot over boat ride. Will check it out. Have a few days in that area but are already booked for an overnight Milford Sound trip and another day in Doubtful Sound.
 
Member's gallery
If you’re only taking a single tele…I would take the 100-400 and both TCs if you have them for flexibility. At 1;1 the prime and TC is very slightly better than the zoom, but the bare lenses are almost indistinguishable to my eye…and with limited kit flexibility I would go with the zoom and also take a wider one like the 14-30 if you have one. I took those 3 on my recent uK trip but the tele never came out of the bag amd 90% of my shots were with the Z8 and 24-120.
 
Member's gallery
Stmall said:
A quick search didn’t show a similar question being asked so looking for advice here please.

My wife and I have a 6 week NZ tour planned and booked. Following the main tourist trail, driving and staying in hotels etc.

it’s not a photo trip per se but I will be looking to use the opportunity to the full. It’s not a birding trip but I will be looking for birding opportunities and we have a couple of nights on Stewart Island with a dedicated trip to Ulva.

So the question is what lenses? We’re from the UK and I can only realistically take a smallish amount of kit. I’ll take the Z9 and the 24-120 which should cover most landscape and general stuff. I can realitonly take one telephoto lens.

I’ve been holding back on the 180-600 (it’s heavier than I want). For wildlife and birds I’m currently using the 500pf.

I am tempted by the 400 f4.5 and TC which gives 2 options. Or the 100-400 plus TC for the range. It’s the same considerations covered in a number of threads. So I’m looking for a specific NZ angle on this. I suspect the landscapes will offer more than the birds much of the time. Would the 100-400 add something if I took that instead of the 500pf? And if I did that would I lose out on the birding shots?

Thanks in anticipation
Click to expand...
What time of year are you going and roughly speaking, what is the route you are driving?
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
The issue, IMO, particularly if taking a Z 9 is going to be the weight.

On a recent trip to NZ I took a Z 6II with 24-120mm and Fuji X-H2S with 150-600mm lens (purchased Fuji combo specifically for the trip). Astro photography was not on my agenda.

Both the 24-120mm and 100-400mm are great for close-up work. I photographed alot of fungi with the 24-120mm on our trip. Although I also have the 14-30mm lens I left it at home and took a few panos for general landscape photography if the 24mm wasn't wide enough. However, if I was specifically wanting to take landscapes I would include the wider lens in the kit.

For some landscape/astro photos, check out Rob Dickinson's work. It might give you some ideas of places to visit which you may-not have considered as yet.

Enjoy your trip, and try not to live it through the viewfinder :)
 
Member's gallery
I'm sure you'll enjoy my country. Particularly the South Island it's a landscape photographer's paradise. Just concentrate on your driving, the southern mountain roads are much more challenging than you'll be used to. At least you'll be used to driving on the left!
I'd bring the 24-120, 14-30, 100-400+tc, and a fast astro prime if you're stopping over in the McKenzie High Country (Twizel/Tekapo/MtCook) Night Sky Zone. You'll find you'll use the 24-120 90% of the time for landscapes, and the 14-30 gets those wider scenes in the Alps. If I had to drop one, it would be the WA, 24-120 as a multi-shot pano gets nice results in the big sweeping vistas you'll encounter; unless you expect to be shooting interiors. Nothing particularly compelling in that area.
 
Member's gallery
I did a driving trip to NZ for 3 weeks in April 2019 specifically the South Island from Christchurch, Lake Tekapo, Mt Cook, Wanaka, Queenstown, Glenorchy, Te Anua, Milford Sound, Invercargill Catlins, Dunedin, Omaru, then back to Christchurch.
Some points of interest for birds:
Orokonui Ecosanctuary just north of Dunedin. I thought this was fantastic, lots of native birds.
orokonui.nz

Home - Orokonui Ecosanctuary

Orokonui Ecosanctuary Te Korowai o Mihiwaka Nau Mai, Haere Mai, Ki Te Korowai o Mihiwaka Open Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday 9:30am - 4:30pm Horopito Café is open 10am - 3pm Surcharge applies on public holidays Sanctuary and Café closed Tuesday and Wednesday Orokonui is a 307...
orokonui.nz orokonui.nz
This is also good at Dunedin:
Royal Albatross Centre
albatross.org.nz

Royal Albatross Centre | Wild Life Tours in Dunedin, NZ

Visit the only mainland breeding colony of Northern Royal Albatross in the world. Watch Dunedin’s famous Royals and more! Book online today!
albatross.org.nz albatross.org.nz

There are a number of zoos etc that are quite good - these both in Christchurch:

Open Range Zoo, Christchurch NZ | Orana Wildlife Park

Visit Orana Wildlife Park the only open range zoo in New Zealand based in Christchurch. We want to provide you with the ultimate animal adventure by giving you an up close and personal experience.
www.oranawildlifepark.co.nz www.oranawildlifepark.co.nz
www.willowbank.co.nz

Willowbank Wildlife Reserve - Christchurch, New Zealand

Willowbank Wildlife Reserve is a wildlife park and nature reserve in Christchurch, New Zealand. No booking required to see Kiwi, Tuatara, Kea, Weka...
www.willowbank.co.nz www.willowbank.co.nz

The Catlins I though was fantastic with all their waterfalls like Purakaunui Falls..

Particularly good place to stay was The Whistling Frog resort which had great food and wine.

I took the following lenses and my Z7:
16-35 f4 VR
Z 24-70 f4
70-200 f2.8E FL VR
500 f5.6 PF
1.4x TCIII.
That was around 5kg (11lb) give or take.

If I were to go again:
Z8
Z 14-24 f2.8
Z 24-120 f4 (I am just about to buy it) if not, the Z 24-70 f2.8S
100-400 f4.5-5.6 VR S
500 f5.6 PF
1.4x TCIII for the 500 PF.
That's around about 5.25g (11.5lbs) give or take.

My trip with each major place:
pbase.com

New Zealand 2019 by Lance B

pbase.com
Click on the images and underneath is the size - use Auto or Original. Click on EXIF to see the lenses used etc.

I want to go back is is a stunning place.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
My last trip to NZ I was still using a D90. Lenses were 12-24 DX, 16-85 and a 70-300 VR. It covered pretty much everything I needed. If I had the choice now I’d consider the 300 PF + TC14III OR 500 PF.
 
Member's gallery
If you bring the 24-120, and your choice is between the 500PF, the 100-400 and maybe the 400, I’d take the zoom. So many detailed landscape shots will be between 100 and 200mm, in the sounds, on mountain tops, etc. I brought the 70-200 last year and that was glued to a camera the entire trip!
 
Member's gallery
Spent 11 days in NZ on the South Island in March. Took my Z9 and ZZ6 II, with 500 f5.6 pf, Z 100-400 f4.5-5.6 S, and Z 24-70 f4 S. I used the 100-400 for most of the telephoto work. Spent a day on the mail boat out of Havelock and used the 500 on the water.
 
Member's gallery
Stmall said:
A quick search didn’t show a similar question being asked so looking for advice here please.

My wife and I have a 6 week NZ tour planned and booked. Following the main tourist trail, driving and staying in hotels etc.

it’s not a photo trip per se but I will be looking to use the opportunity to the full. It’s not a birding trip but I will be looking for birding opportunities and we have a couple of nights on Stewart Island with a dedicated trip to Ulva.

So the question is what lenses? We’re from the UK and I can only realistically take a smallish amount of kit. I’ll take the Z9 and the 24-120 which should cover most landscape and general stuff. I can realitonly take one telephoto lens.

I’ve been holding back on the 180-600 (it’s heavier than I want). For wildlife and birds I’m currently using the 500pf.

I am tempted by the 400 f4.5 and TC which gives 2 options. Or the 100-400 plus TC for the range. It’s the same considerations covered in a number of threads. So I’m looking for a specific NZ angle on this. I suspect the landscapes will offer more than the birds much of the time. Would the 100-400 add something if I took that instead of the 500pf? And if I did that would I lose out on the birding shots?

Thanks in anticipation
Click to expand...
400mm and 500mm are pretty close.
The 100-400 is a good lens and the close focus is less than one metre.
If you have it the 400mm f4.5 is light fast AF and very sharp and is my preferred long lens these days.
My 600mm and 400mm f2.8 are big and heavy and I seem to be leaving them behind lately.
A TC wouldn't degrade the 400mm f4.5 much. And as long as a close focus of nearly 2 metres is enough... 🦘
 
Member's gallery
I like the 24-120mm for all rounder. If you have the 500pf add that 1.4TC for wildlife. Do not fear higher iso's. Remember NZ is not called the land of the long white cloud for nothing. However if you do get some clear skies you will kick yourself if you do not have a fast 14mm lens for astro photography. There will be many Botle 1 sites where the milkyway with no moon provides enough light to see the landscape. (Coming from the UK those dark skies will surprise you. NZ is also one of the best places to see the southern aurora. If that goes off read up on settings before you go). Night skies with those mountains and lakes are things that dreams are made of. Good travel tripod also essential for landscapes and nightscapes.
 
Member's gallery
Last November I took a boat from New York to Boston then up to Newfoundland and the St Lawrence to Quebec and Montreal. I too, debated which of my many lenses to take. I opted to take just the one, the z24-120mm f4 S. It performed spectacularly - the autumnal colours were great. I even got some excellent bird photos from a walk in a Canadian national park one day. So for me, that's a must take lens! If you know that you'll see plenty of wildlife, then also take a long lens - my preference is a zoom. Recently I rented the z100-400 for a cruise (in July) around the Svalbard archepelago. I took a wide angle lens too for that trip.
Generally, I find, as long as do the research, that two lenses cover my needs. I have in the past taken a variety, 3, 4 but in the end one one a lot, ue another a little and the other two, never.
 
Member's gallery
In reference to above, these were in Victoria, Australia in the last few months. On these same days the images from Tasmania and NZ were sensational. Be sure to download a few aurora warning aps.
P.S. DO NOT forget that fast wide angle lens!
Sothern Aurora_IP2 Chroma processed.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


Aurora & MW-Pano.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roy
Member's gallery
I just got back from a 3 week family trip to New Zealand last night. I brought the Z9, 24-70 f/2.8, 20mm 1.8, and 100-400. I often times had wished I had a little more reach than 24-70 so highly recommend bringing the 24-120 for landscapes. I'm not a huge birder but I brought the 100-400 for any opportunities that came along (which wasn't many for me) and mostly for landscapes. Mostly because its the type of shooter that I am but I enjoy doing a lot of panoramas and often times I zoom in close and shoot them so I did a LOT of that in NZ. I brought the 20mm mainly for astro but between clouds, moon and family obligations I didn't really use it. One thing that I found is that birds there do not have natural predators (for the most part) and will often times get really close to you. Again I'm not a birder so I wasn't really looking for birds a lot either. The 70-200 f2.8 is similar in weight to 100-400 so if you are looking to purchase a lens do so with what you will use after the trip. I hope you have a great trip. We certainly did. Tons of photo opportunities there. Added note that I went in winter as well so that is probably another reason I didn't see many birds.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Thanks to everyone who has replied. A lot of food for thought.

We’re going in January which makes the aurora less likely. And I suspect, like Darrelhar I may have little opportunity for nighttime photography.

Currently I’m minded to opt for
14-30
24-120
100-400
1.4 tc
The 500 pf wouldn’t make the cut so I will struggle with birds in lower light.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top