Long lens for landscape?

[Boo53]

PS: I hope somebody can chime in about Tamron lenses.

I owned a Tamron 70-200 f8 with my Sony A mount gear (now given to daughter) and replaced it with a 70-180 f2.8 e-mount. Lovely sharp lenses, both of them. The A mount had a bit of weight to it but the e-mount is quite light

A friend has a 150-500 for his canon, uses it for birding, a swears by it.

- - - Updated - - -

Hi all,

I have an upcoming trip to Port Campbell (VIC) and surrounds. My sense is that a lot of the pics I see online of this area are taken with relatively long lenses and look to be taken from various lookouts.

My gear is a 5Ds, EF 16-35mm f4L IS USM and a EF 24-105mm f4L IS USM.

The 24-105 is a great lens but not long and it won't take either of Canon's extenders.

So the question is, is a long lens desirable for the location and if so, what?

Bonus question is what 3rd party lens are comparable to Canon's L series?

Cheers,

Mark

It's about 12 months since I was last down there so memory might be a bit off, but I can't really remember any shot that I'd wished I'd put anything longer than the 24-70 on for. Most of my shots would have been with the 16-35.

James suggested having a look at the Redwoods near Beech Forest. If you head that way Hopetoun Falls and Beauchamp falls are each with 5 km of there and with all the recent rain would be flowing wonderfully.