Safari lens advice needed

My wife and I are going on safari to Tanzania later this summer, and I'm hoping to capture some good pictures of the wildlife (as well as usual tourist and landscape shots). I've never been on Safari before, so I'm looking for advice about what lenses and gear in general I should bring.

I use a 5DMkIII, and the longest lens I currently own is a 70-200mm f/2.8 IS. I've heard that for serious wildlife photography I really should be looking at 300mm, 400mm, and up. There are a few different options, and within reason I'd be happy to buy (or rent, for more expensive gear) whatever the right tool for the job is. However, a big restriction I have is in the total weight of gear I can bring - plus I'd be super nervous about bringing more than I could hand-carry (the thought of checking expensive lenses on internal African flights that are notorious for losing bags makes me shudder).

Given the restrictions, I can basically only bring two lenses, maybe three if one of them is really small (I could probably slip a 50mm f/1.4 into a pocket somewhere, say). My intention is to bring my regular walkabout lens, a 24-105 f/4, in addition to the 70-200mm as my long lens, and then also bring a 2X extender to get extra reach on the 70-200.

Does that plan make sense? Would I be disappointed with the image quality from using an extender? Could I get away with a 1.4X extender, even? Do I need to achieve a longer effective focal length than 400mm to really be happy?

Assume I'm more interested in larger beasts than in birds, and that my quality bar is "discerning amateur" (i.e. not looking to compete with a wildlife pro, but want pictures I'd be happy to print at a decent size and hang on my wall).

If you do recommend a longer lens than the 70-200, which other lens would you pitch off the boat to make room? Assume I need at least some capability to take pictures of stuff other than lions (we have a few days on the beach, etc.).

In this case, I think you have to make a judgement call on the longer lens. The Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 will give you better results at 400mm @ f/5.6 than the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS (I) with the 2x Extender at 400mm f/5.6.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=113&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=7&API= 0&LensComp=103&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp =6&APIComp=2

If you happen to have EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II, then the results are much closer:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...mp=5&APIComp=0

Looking at the ISO chart results should help you decide whether the incremental image quality will be worth the investment. If you're curious, check other comparable focal length lenses (300-400mm) to see how they compare to your 70-200mm + 2x Extender combo.

I'd consider renting a 300/2.8L IS II and 2xIII.

Thanks! That comparison is definitely helpful. I do have the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II, so the results are close, but the 100-400 @ f/5.6 is still better at 400mm. However, with just a 1.4X extender the 70-200mm might even perform a little better. It also looks as though stopping down even a little helps quite a bit in bringing the extender combo closer. There should be plenty of available light, so I can probably afford to stop down to f/8 and still achieve a reasonable shutter speed for stopping action. Definitely looks like that tips the balance in favor of the extender combo.

Anyone with safari experience have thoughts? Is performance at 400mm the right thing to worry about? In practice will I actually end up zoomed in a little tighter on larger game subjects? (Or conversely, would I sometimes be wishing for an even longer lens?)

@neuroanatomist - yes, renting a 300/2.8L and a 2X extender would definitely give me massive reach. However, that's a heavy lens, so I would definitely be leaving a lot of other gear behind in order to make room (no 70-200 for sure, and any thoughts I had of sneaking a wide-angle lens into my wife's baggage would probably go by the wayside as well).

Question is, how much value would I get out of it? Is that combo mostly useful for birds (which I'm not that bothered about), or is it considered essential even for larger game?

It depends partly on where you're going. Serengeti and other parks, you're a reasonable distance from the wildlife. The nice thing about the 300 + 2x is that you have the 2x if you need it, but 300 is a good length, and f/2.8 is good when the wildlife is active (dawn/dusk).

If you go to Ngorongoro, the 24-105 will be fine much of the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

It depends partly on where you're going. Serengeti and other parks, you're a reasonable distance from the wildlife. The nice thing about the 300 + 2x is that you have the 2x if you need it, but 300 is a good length, and f/2.8 is good when the wildlife is active (dawn/dusk).

If you go to Ngorongoro, the 24-105 will be fine much of the time.

---

Check out Andrew's shots. Looks like he used the 300f2.8 both with and without the 1.4.

rent the 300 f2.8 or the new 400 f4 LII. both are amazing. bring a 2x converter.
pro tip: you can hang any lens around your neck. so what if you are wearing the 400 on your body in the cabin. it's not packed, it's not luggage.

Good point... I nearly suggested both TCs, the 1.4 may be a better choice if taking only one.

I was last there before I had a dSLR, took a P&S superzoom with a 38-380mm FF equivalent lens. On Zanzibar and occasionally in Tanzania, wider would have been nice. In Tanzania, many times I could have used a longer lens. But the 5DIII allows quite a bit more latitude for cropping than I had, so 420mm would likely have done the job.

In Rwanda, I was taking tight portraits of mountain gorillas at the FF-equivalent of 85-135mm.

Thanks guys, this is super helpful information. Those are some really nice shots, BTW.

Looks like renting the 300mm f/2.8 may be the way to go, bringing an extender for some extra flexibility. Will keep the 24-105 f/4 for general purpose use and reluctantly leave my favorite lens (70-200mm f/2.8 IS II) behind this time.

We're going to both the Serengeti and Ngorongoro. Is it worth trying to find a way to cram in a wide-angle lens as well (I'm thinking 16-35mm) for landscapes, or are there not enough opportunities to make it worthwhile.

The weather can really add to landscape/scenics depending on the time of year, there was some wonderful crepuscular light over the evenings in the Serengeti when I was there. But I think for the most part the 24-105L would address your landscape needs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clemmb

Check out Andrew's shots. Looks like he used the 300f2.8 both with and without the 1.4.

---

Mark is right - I was using that combination, but usually on a 1D IV for an extra 1.3 crop factor. I also had a 70-200 f/2.8 and 24-70 f/2.8, 17-40 f/4 and 5D II.

I suggest you to take the longest lens you can, but I understand your concerns about weight and airline security. A 24-105 and 100-400 would be a good two-lens solution, with a 1.4 extender (you would lose auto focus capability with a 2x extender on the 100-400).

Some other points to bear in mind:

• Wildlife is most active at dusk and dawn, when the light is poorest. Be prepared to go high with the ISO.
• Dust can be a problem if you are changing lenses or inserting an extender. Two bodies helped me to overcome that issue, but a large zoom range is an alternative solution. Take a sensor cleaning kit.
• 24-105 will be fine for general purpose landscapes on a 5D III. You won't need anything wider. I only took a handful of shots with the 17-40, and most of those were at >24mm. Some of my landscapes (e.g. the herd of wildebeest on the plain) were shot at 420mm.
• Take some binoculars. You need to find the wildlife before you can take pictures of it (unless you are content with pictures of grazing ruminants or sleeping lions)

Have a great trip!

Edit - since you're going to Ngorongoro, you might be able to justify taking a 16-35mm to get a shot of the crater from the rim like this (except your crater will be bigger and have lots of wildlife in it)

Thanks! This is really helpful advice from everyone. Trip is a way out still (not until later this summer), but I'll be sure to post my experiences from it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Stringer

Edit - since you're going to Ngorongoro, you might be able to justify taking a 16-35mm to get a shot of the crater from the rim like this (except your crater will be bigger and have lots of wildlife in it)

---

The rim is high, and from the accessible points, the wildlife is pretty distant...this is 38mm FF equivalent.

Attachment 1746

The binoculars are a great idea - even a small pair of 8x25's can help. Also, when you book your safari, make sure the outfit uses Land Rovers. This was ours, just me and my wife with the guide so lots of flexibility.

Attachment 1743

If you go with one of the minivan outfits, you may find yourself in a ditch, and need a real Land Rover to rescue you...

Attachment 1744

We thought it was amusing. So did this kitty, who was close by in the grass at camera left. :)

Attachment 1745

Have a great trip!

Neuro, it's amazing how the memory fades with time. It's fifteen years since I stood on the edge of the Ngorongoro crater and I had forgotten it had a lake in it! I didn't mean to imply that you would be able to make out the individual creatures, just that it would look less sterile than my more recent visit to a caldera elsewhere. Maybe 24mm will be wide enough after all.

I recall another safari thread a couple of years ago here. Unfortunately, some of the posts were truncated when this site was moved to a new host, but plenty of useful tips remain.