Antarctica, TdF and TdP specific questions...

I am going to the Antarctica this December and will take the cruise from Ushuaia to Antarctica and back. We are NOT going to the Falklands & South Georgia. Before and after the cruise, I will visit some specific bird photography sites in Tierra del Fuego and Torres del Paine. My current equipment plan for the trip is as follows:

[ul]
[li]Bodies will be 5D4 and 5Ds [/li]
[li]Canon 500/4 IS-II lens for sure. [/li]
[li]Canon 1.4X-III and 2X-III extenders[/li]
[li]Canon 16-35 f/4 IS lens likely - debating between this and the 24 - 70 f/4 IS[/li]
[/ul]

Since I know that many folks (including EJ) have been to the Antarctica, here are some specific questions:

[ul]
[li]I am not planning on taking the 500/4 on shore in Antarctica - it is for bird photography at other locations before and after the trip. [/li]
So, would it make sense to take a Sigma 150-600 S instead of Canon 100-400 IS-II for zodiac landings? The landings seem to be rougher compared to my previous zodiac experiences in the Galapagos. 
[li]Would you take the 16-35 or the 24-70? [/li]
[/ul]

Other lenses I have are 70-200 f/4L IS and 50 f/1.8 STM.

Thanks in advance for all your help. Any *specific* pointers to your experiences and what you would've done differently would be very welcome.

Thanks again!

By far the most useful lens off the ship for landscape shots for me while cruising down the peninsula was the 70-200! It is also very useful for ice detail images while zodiac cruising. You have a huge gap right in the most useful range.

If I were going back I would take the following:
a7R Mk II with 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200 or 70-300
D500 with 150-600 and 16-80

My longest lens was the Nikon 200-400 when I went and that was perfectly adequate. I may have used it with a 1.4x a few times.

Personally I would not take a 500 f/4 due to it's lack of versatility and size. Remember you have to be able to get this stuff onto a zodiac in a drybag and not impede others.

Pretty much what EJ says. I used the long end of the 70-300 once for about 30 seconds. 16-35 a must for icebergs if you want to include the environment. My 24-105 was mainly for wildlife when landing and for sea birds from the ship. (Yes they fly that close).
Don't forget a storm jacket for the camera. I took a dry bag but never used it. I used a smaller Thinktank backback for landings. Watching photographers lugging all that gear they never used was something to see. Also, never used the tripod. Completely impractical in the snow and a pain to decontaminate on every return to the ship.
Incredibly dusty environment. The sensor was such a mess after two days. If I went again I'd probably have two identical cameras with the 70-300 on one and the 24-105 on the other for landings, and the 16-35 for icebergs. Any I'd never change lenses outside of a bathroom. Don't use Canon anymore, but you get the idea.
READ THE SUB FINE PRINT ON ANY SEASICKNESS PRODUCTS. What is fine for a day may give you grief after three days.
You'll have a great time.
David

Hi EJ and David, thanks a lot for your comments and insights.

EJ, I wasn't planning on taking the 500/4 on the pangas, it would be too difficult to handle. I will likely take the 500/4 and the tripod with me, just not down the ship in Antarctica. It is mostly for my birding before and after the cruise. Since the whole family is coming, I don't have any problem carrying the gear. That said, I would likely take the 70-200 based on your insights. Do you think it is necessary to switch out the 100-400 IS-II with the 150-600 Sigma (S or C) or Tamron G2?

David, thanks for the details. Based on both your recommendations, I will likely take the 16-35 and the 24-70. I always have the storm jackets for my lenses, so that is not an issue. Thanks for the warning again regarding the sea-sickness meds - I do need to use the patch for pelagics and am acutely aware of this as well.

Thanks again!

I would consider for zodiac tours 16-35 or 24-70mm on one camera and if you can handle 2 bodies also the 70-200mm If the weather was calm have the 1.4x in your pocket just in case. ( I would consider these combos on shore landings also).

Do you all ready own 150 -600mm or the Canon 100-400mm? If own all ready take either on shore landings. I think you do need some kind of tele zoom to isolate subjects that you can't get close to. 100-400 + 1.4x would get you 140-560mm and be close to the 150-600 lens.

Whole family coming... do you have image capture devices for them?

Thanks Patrick. I am thinking of using the 100-400 for shore landings along with the 16-35 and 24-70 for the zodiac cruises.