What lenses for an African safari?
Discussion
I know it's some time off, but I am going to Africa on safari in September 2010. (It's just that I am VERY excited about it 
)
What lenses do I need to take?
I have the following:
Nikon 12-24
Nikon 18-70
Nikon 80-200
Nikon 60 macro (that'll be handy!!!!)
Sigma 18-50 macro
I really don't know how close I am going to get to the animoles, so was thinking maybe I should also get a 2x convertor for the 80-200???
Any suggestions from them wot has been on a safari before?
Ta!
)What lenses do I need to take?
I have the following:
Nikon 12-24
Nikon 18-70
Nikon 80-200
Nikon 60 macro (that'll be handy!!!!)
Sigma 18-50 macro
I really don't know how close I am going to get to the animoles, so was thinking maybe I should also get a 2x convertor for the 80-200???
Any suggestions from them wot has been on a safari before?
Ta!
I went in October - took the following:
Sigma 10-20
Nikkor 28-70 f/2.8
Sigma 150-500
The Sigma was on the camera almost the entire time, and the vast majority of the photos I took were at 500mm. In some cases you may get very close to the animals but you can't rely on that happening.
You need a long lens - if the performance of the 80-200 with a 2x converter is acceptable, then that is probably as good as renting something. If you do rent something long and fast, be aware of the size and weight of the lens.
Remember to stop taking photos and actually take it in once in a while, it's an amazing experience... Have fun!
Sigma 10-20
Nikkor 28-70 f/2.8
Sigma 150-500
The Sigma was on the camera almost the entire time, and the vast majority of the photos I took were at 500mm. In some cases you may get very close to the animals but you can't rely on that happening.
You need a long lens - if the performance of the 80-200 with a 2x converter is acceptable, then that is probably as good as renting something. If you do rent something long and fast, be aware of the size and weight of the lens.
Remember to stop taking photos and actually take it in once in a while, it's an amazing experience... Have fun!
Fezant Pluckah said:
I was thinking of renting something extra long. Any ideas as to where to rent it from?
Have a search in here because there were a couple of recent recommendations.BUT (and at the risk of stating the bleedin' obvious) bear in mind you'll need to pay a deposit for the full cost of the lens, and check the cost of insurance.
Also, big lenses tend to be heavy to lug around for any length of time so you will need a monopod to support it, and not a cheap flimsy on either. In fact, that's true of the 80-200 + 2x converter.
Oh, and as someone said, don't just turn it into a photography trip. Stop and enjoy what's going on around you.
Fezant Pluckah said:
Thanks for that _dobbo_
I was thinking of renting something extra long. Any ideas as to where to rent it from?
lensesforhire.co.uk, I've used them a few times now and their service is brilliant ... plus they don't require a deposit. I would check on the insurance they include to see if it'll cover you abroad though.I was thinking of renting something extra long. Any ideas as to where to rent it from?
This should be just right for you Jim.
Definitely take a longer lense than 200mm as although you will get close to some animals there are bound to be others that you'll want to be photographing which will stay tantalisingly out of reach.
Take a macro as well if you can as around your camp there are bound to be numerous small things (flowers, insects, lizards etc) that can keep you occupied whenever you're not out and about.
Where are you going out of interest?
Take a macro as well if you can as around your camp there are bound to be numerous small things (flowers, insects, lizards etc) that can keep you occupied whenever you're not out and about.
Where are you going out of interest?
On a more serious note something of decent quality (but not too heavy to move) like this would be well recommended
http://www.lensesforhire.co.uk/nikon-af-s-200-400m...
Meant to be a cracking bit of kit.
If you were shooting Canon you could take this: http://www.lensesforhire.co.uk/canon-ef-1200mm-f56...
http://www.lensesforhire.co.uk/nikon-af-s-200-400m...
Meant to be a cracking bit of kit.
If you were shooting Canon you could take this: http://www.lensesforhire.co.uk/canon-ef-1200mm-f56...
That 200-400 looks like a winner. f/4 will be handy as much of your safari will take place in the evening when the light isn't very strong.
It shouldn't be too big and heavy either. The only thing I'd advise you watch for is what your hand luggage allowance is as some airlines will limit you to 5KG or 7KG - I got caught out with this. That lens and body alone will probably tip the scales at over 5KG...
Make sure it fits in your bag, with your camera body attached - you don't want to be taking the lens off every time you pack the camera away. I had to buy a new bag to fit my lens in!
It shouldn't be too big and heavy either. The only thing I'd advise you watch for is what your hand luggage allowance is as some airlines will limit you to 5KG or 7KG - I got caught out with this. That lens and body alone will probably tip the scales at over 5KG...
Make sure it fits in your bag, with your camera body attached - you don't want to be taking the lens off every time you pack the camera away. I had to buy a new bag to fit my lens in!
I agree with dobbo - you've no idea whether the animals will be 10 foot from your jeep (happened to us more than once) or over 100 yards away.
My advice would be - take 2 bodies, and DO NOT change lenses in the field - you can't imagine how dusty it is out there, my bodies now need cleaning out just from the 'bellows' effect of my lenses! So beg, borrow or rent a 2nd body...hell, buy a cheap one off e-Bay for the trip!
I took the following (on 2 bodies):-
- Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
- Canon 70-300 IS f/4-5.6
...and there were several times the Canon was too short, and a little too soft at full-stretch. Knowing what I know now, I'd have got a 1.4 teleconverter and wound the zoom back a little to get some extra sharpness back...OR hired a 100-400 f/4, possibly still with a TC!
...so in your position I'd put the 18-70 or 18-50 on one body (whichever is the sharper/quicker lens). This will be good enough for Elephants, Giraffes, landscapes, and any predators that get close. And then get something BIG and put that on your main body - over 80% of my animal shots were taken at focal lengths of over 100, and probably over half at or near 300.
Re: "take the time to experience it" - ab-so-bloody-lutely! I missed that cheetah making the kill because I was looking through the lens and lost the damn thing!
Do strike a balance...
Re: weight of lenses - two issues:
- airline carry-on - if it won't fit in a decent-sized rucksack, you may get asked questions. If you're taking a local puddle-jumper, you may get asked to put it in the hold!!! (And this is Africa, remember...)
- lugging it around. Not as big a deal as you may think, IF you're on a private safari, as you can leave the bag on the seat/floor beside you. If a group tour, and the bus/jeep (please god a jeep with a pop-top or roll-back sides for visibility) is full, then it might be wedged by your feet the whole time...
...so that Bigma may be a stunning bit of kit, but if it's going to cause you logisitical issues and get in the way of your holiday in other ways, think about another plan - it's not all about the photos, after all...
PS - have a look here - Sun 8th Nov post by me - look at the EXIF data - all are 250 and upwards, and the 3 at 300 are crops, not the full image. NOW bear in mind we were the only people at our lodge to see that leopard (~15-20m when in the tree), and everyone else only saw another one that was ~100yds + away...and think what sort of photos I (and they) got of that one...we were EXCEPTIONALLY lucky to see all this lot as close as they were! Plan in case you don't have that luck...
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
PPS - where are you going? And what sort of trip is it? And how long for? And with who? Details man, details!!!
My advice would be - take 2 bodies, and DO NOT change lenses in the field - you can't imagine how dusty it is out there, my bodies now need cleaning out just from the 'bellows' effect of my lenses! So beg, borrow or rent a 2nd body...hell, buy a cheap one off e-Bay for the trip!
I took the following (on 2 bodies):-
- Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
- Canon 70-300 IS f/4-5.6
...and there were several times the Canon was too short, and a little too soft at full-stretch. Knowing what I know now, I'd have got a 1.4 teleconverter and wound the zoom back a little to get some extra sharpness back...OR hired a 100-400 f/4, possibly still with a TC!
...so in your position I'd put the 18-70 or 18-50 on one body (whichever is the sharper/quicker lens). This will be good enough for Elephants, Giraffes, landscapes, and any predators that get close. And then get something BIG and put that on your main body - over 80% of my animal shots were taken at focal lengths of over 100, and probably over half at or near 300.
Re: "take the time to experience it" - ab-so-bloody-lutely! I missed that cheetah making the kill because I was looking through the lens and lost the damn thing!
Do strike a balance...Re: weight of lenses - two issues:
- airline carry-on - if it won't fit in a decent-sized rucksack, you may get asked questions. If you're taking a local puddle-jumper, you may get asked to put it in the hold!!! (And this is Africa, remember...)
- lugging it around. Not as big a deal as you may think, IF you're on a private safari, as you can leave the bag on the seat/floor beside you. If a group tour, and the bus/jeep (please god a jeep with a pop-top or roll-back sides for visibility) is full, then it might be wedged by your feet the whole time...
...so that Bigma may be a stunning bit of kit, but if it's going to cause you logisitical issues and get in the way of your holiday in other ways, think about another plan - it's not all about the photos, after all...
PS - have a look here - Sun 8th Nov post by me - look at the EXIF data - all are 250 and upwards, and the 3 at 300 are crops, not the full image. NOW bear in mind we were the only people at our lodge to see that leopard (~15-20m when in the tree), and everyone else only saw another one that was ~100yds + away...and think what sort of photos I (and they) got of that one...we were EXCEPTIONALLY lucky to see all this lot as close as they were! Plan in case you don't have that luck...
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
PPS - where are you going? And what sort of trip is it? And how long for? And with who? Details man, details!!!
You'll get quite close to some, maybe 10 metres or less from a lion, but larger animals like elephants could be 50m+ (you wouldn't want to get that close to an elephant!)
I used a Canon 30D (not full frame, so 1.6 magnification factor) with a sigma 80-400mm for driving around, and (I can't really remember using it) something like the kit 18-55mm for people pics around the lodges.
Be careful with a 2x extender, it increase the F number, so make sure the auto focus still operates.
Also - my sigma lense has optical image stabilisation, which worked awesomely. You probably won't do a lot of walking around, a lot of your pics will be taken from a vehicle, so forget about a tripod. If you have optical stabilisation you won't need a monopod either. I've taken sharp pics standing up in the back of a moving vehicle (moving very slowly though!).
So, I'd recommend OIS and a focal length of at least 300mm.
Weight was not an issue for me as I didn't walk far, the risk of getting eaten increases exponentially with every step from the vehicle
Dust is an issue. Don't change lenses in the field unless necessary.
I'd echo what others have said, don't feel obliged to be the trip photographer while everyone else enjoys the view.
Don't spend all your time squinting through the viewfinder or looking at a screen!
I used a Canon 30D (not full frame, so 1.6 magnification factor) with a sigma 80-400mm for driving around, and (I can't really remember using it) something like the kit 18-55mm for people pics around the lodges.
Be careful with a 2x extender, it increase the F number, so make sure the auto focus still operates.
Also - my sigma lense has optical image stabilisation, which worked awesomely. You probably won't do a lot of walking around, a lot of your pics will be taken from a vehicle, so forget about a tripod. If you have optical stabilisation you won't need a monopod either. I've taken sharp pics standing up in the back of a moving vehicle (moving very slowly though!).
So, I'd recommend OIS and a focal length of at least 300mm.
Weight was not an issue for me as I didn't walk far, the risk of getting eaten increases exponentially with every step from the vehicle
Dust is an issue. Don't change lenses in the field unless necessary.
I'd echo what others have said, don't feel obliged to be the trip photographer while everyone else enjoys the view.
Don't spend all your time squinting through the viewfinder or looking at a screen!
Firstly the Nikon will give significantly better images at 400mm, but the Sigma does go to 500mm so of course you can't compare at that focal length.
The Sigma at 500mm is F/6.3, whilst the Nikon is constant f/4 across the range, which is a big difference. It will basically mean the difference between using ISO400 and ISO1600 in low light (pretty sure I've got that right).
If you can afford it and don't mind the weight, I'd go with the Nikon every time. It's not as long but you'll get a better image and can always crop if you need to.
Just to add - I purchased the Sigma 150-500 to take with me - I should have rented. If I had, I'd have chosen the Nikon 200-400.
The Sigma at 500mm is F/6.3, whilst the Nikon is constant f/4 across the range, which is a big difference. It will basically mean the difference between using ISO400 and ISO1600 in low light (pretty sure I've got that right).
If you can afford it and don't mind the weight, I'd go with the Nikon every time. It's not as long but you'll get a better image and can always crop if you need to.
Just to add - I purchased the Sigma 150-500 to take with me - I should have rented. If I had, I'd have chosen the Nikon 200-400.
Edited by _dobbo_ on Friday 13th November 12:34
_dobbo_ said:
The Sigma at 500mm is F/6.3, whilst the Nikon is constant f/4 across the range, which is a big difference. It will basically mean the difference between using ISO400 and ISO1600 in low light (pretty sure I've got that right).
Close f4 to f6.3 is 1 1/3 stops of light, 400ASA to 1600ASA is 2 stops so 800ASA and a bit of shutter movement would be closer.</pedant>
Rofly Lollers said:
You'll get quite close to some, maybe 10 metres or less from a lion, but larger animals like elephants could be 50m+ (you wouldn't want to get that close to an elephant!)
I had numerous pics of elephants within 5-10 metres (at most) from the car. Also ended up uncomfortably close to white rhino whilst in a very small hire car so anything can happen and the two bodies/2 lenses idea does sound senisble if it's possible. When I was in East Africa a few years ago, I found that animals were significantly closer than expected, esp. in the Ngorogoro (Sp?) crater in TZ, where a 70-200 was easily enough to get a good headshot of a lion sat a metre from the jeep...
Based on my (limited) experience I'd say low light performance and quality were the critical issues, not outright reach. Unless you're a bird fan, 300mm should be enough for anything worth photographing. Further than that, you need to try and get closer! I would also forget teleconverters if you can good basic glass and modern body - IMO it's better to crop a shot from a good lens, than soften it with a TC. I'd rather have a perfectly sharp image that I have to crop heavily, than a soft image that I can't use. Plus, you loose light and add shutter speed.
I'm off to Southern Africa in a few weeks in fact - Zimbabwe, Mozambique and SOuth Africa (inc Kruger). Have purchased a sigma 400mm F5.6 AF APO off the bay for a couple of hundred pounds. Will let you know how I get on... (will back up a 70-200mm F2.8). Will take the TC's as well, but not expecting too much.
Based on my (limited) experience I'd say low light performance and quality were the critical issues, not outright reach. Unless you're a bird fan, 300mm should be enough for anything worth photographing. Further than that, you need to try and get closer! I would also forget teleconverters if you can good basic glass and modern body - IMO it's better to crop a shot from a good lens, than soften it with a TC. I'd rather have a perfectly sharp image that I have to crop heavily, than a soft image that I can't use. Plus, you loose light and add shutter speed.
I'm off to Southern Africa in a few weeks in fact - Zimbabwe, Mozambique and SOuth Africa (inc Kruger). Have purchased a sigma 400mm F5.6 AF APO off the bay for a couple of hundred pounds. Will let you know how I get on... (will back up a 70-200mm F2.8). Will take the TC's as well, but not expecting too much.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff