Advice on safari lens « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

Advice on safari lens

(55 posts) (16 voices)

Tags:

12 3 Next »

Victor

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 24
offline

Hello

I'm a hobby photographer and I'm going on a 5-6 day safari trip in Tanzania. I'm looking for advice on gear upgrade for the trip. I currently have D80 with 14-24mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 70-200mm f2.8 VR2 in addition to my SB800, tripod and a couple of sigma lenses (30mm f1.4 and 105mm f2.8 macro).

I have read that 300mm on DX is minimum for safari, but my budget is limited. I could afford the 300mm f4 + a Nikon TC but that is stretching it. I'm planning on upgrading to FX in the future, but for this trip I'd rather upgrade my reach. Besides I would rather want the rumored D700s/x or D800.

The lenses I'm considering are:
nikon 80-400mm
nikon 300mm f4 + a TC

sigma 100-300mm f4 + a TC
sigma 50-500mm (bigma the old without os)
sigma 150-500mm (bigmos)

I'm currently leaning towards the sigma 150-500mm. I have read lots of reviews of all the lenses but I still struggle to decide. I'm aware of sigmas rather bad reputation in QA, but I'm very happy with my 30mm. It is also about half the price compared to Nikon 300mm f4 + TC, which leads to more money for other stuff like beanbags, extra memory cards and extra batteries. Any advice would be appreciated.

I noticed that you recommend to wait on both the 80-400mm and the 300mm f4 in the price watch. How likely is It that an upgrade of either of these will be available in stores before June? No chance?

Posted 3 years ago #
Victor

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 24
offline

Just to mention it, I've also considered only buying a TC for my 70-200. I heard that the 1.7 is a nice combo. That would get me a 340mm at 5.6, but I fear this would be too short. I've also read that the 70-200 is somehow "shorter" than other lenses at 200, anyone know any more about this?

Posted 3 years ago #
Victor

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 24
offline

I'm also interested in experience you might have with different TC. I hear most people recommend 1.4, some say 1.7 is OK, and only a few recommends 2.0. I have seen Impressive pictures with 70-200 and 2.0 so I'm wondering why so many dis-encourage it.

Also Kenko seems to have 1.4 and 2.0 TC for half the price, could in fact get both for the price of one Nikon TC. And they work on more lenses if I have understood correctly. Love to hear more about experience with these.

Edit: I'll stop spamming my own post now until i get some feedback :)

Posted 3 years ago #
DazMSmith

new member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 1
offline

Brilliant trip to plan Victor. I did something similar to the Masai Mara in neigbouring Kenya about 18 months ago. It was my first photographic safari, and my first Digital SLR, which I'd picked up 2 weeks before the trip. You can check the pics out here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thesmiths/sets/72157608011618402/
(These pics from the trip are pretty much unprocessed RAW images, converted to JPEG for uploading to Flickr.)

The equipment I used was:
Nikon D80
Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S VR DX
Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 G ED AF-S
Nikon 200-400mm f/4 G ED-IF AF-S VR
Nikon SB600 Flash

The 14-24 is BRILLIANT for landscapes on safari, or HDR type images if you have the inclination and a good tripod. African sunsets almost BEG to be photographed.
The 18-200 was OK, versatile, but your 70-200 is far, far better lens than mine. That'll be a fantastic lens to have with you.
Finally, I HIRED the Nikon 200-400, which is a very pricey lens, but it is incredibly sharp, and I would encourage you to do the same. The trip is a once in a lifetime trip, don't compromise it by having the wrong lenses with you.
You already have a fantastic start with the 14-24 and 70-200 f2.8 ... but for the wildlife you REALLY need at the very least the 200-400. You *could* take the 1.4 teleconverter with it, but then you lose something in its use. Given that you shoot in the mornings and sunsets, primarily, you want SHARP and FAST.
You won't go wrong with the Nikon 200-400mm f/4 G ED-IF AF-S VR.

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

victor - out of the lenses You have I will go for zoom, unless You are familiar with primes, I would go for the 80-400 (yes, it's slow, but You have plenty of time with big animals, and the IQ is perfect) or S120-400 OS, I wouldn't recommend the 150-500 OS as it's quality is not as high as from the 50-500 not to mention the other two. If You can spend more, than go for the 70-200 (nikon version either VR I or VR II) and add TC 17 or the new TC20

Posted 3 years ago #
gelu88

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 295
offline

Since this an almost once in a lifetime trip, its pretty useless to buy a 300mm and have it sit on a shelf for years after your trip.

I suggest you rent a bunch of gear. Considering the costs involved you will have a great time with it.

Thom hogan just reviewed the 200-400 and spent a significant portion of it comparing it with the 300mm. Check it out.

Also since all of your lenses are FX, you should rent a D700 for a week or two. That 14-24 will gain tremendously and you'll get better performance across the board. A 10 day rental from lensrentals.com is $350.

the 300mm is $300 for 10 days and the 200-400 is $400 for the same period.

Posted 3 years ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

I would be cautious about renting gear for a trip. If anything happens to the gear you not only loose your deposit, plus the rental fee, but you also would have to pay replacement fees as well. Yikes.

Posted 3 years ago #
mb

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,160
offline

Tom Hogan quote "Otherwise flawless. For close-in subjects, you give up next to nothing except aperture against the 400mm. Or the 70-200mm at 200mm. Or either 300mm. That's pretty remarkable for a complex zoom."
You can find the rest at:
http://www.bythom.com/Nikkor-200-400mm-lensreview.htm
Not so bad really and he compared it with 400 F/2.8 which is better for subjects 100m or more but for twice the price it should be.

Posted 3 years ago #
Victor

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 24
offline

@DazMSmith Very nice pictures, I can't wait to take my own and hope they turn out as nice as yours :P

@adamz I already have the 70-200 VR II, but I'm looking for more reach for a reasonable price. Would you recommend going for the new 20TC rather than 80-400 or sigma 50-500? I kinda figured that 80-400 and sigma 50-500 had too much overlap (on my 70-200). In my line of thought the 150-500 was only a 3.3 x zoom and in general a 3.3 x zoom would be easier to make than a 10 x zoom and therefore a better chance of getting a good one.. In addition the 150-500 has OS. I know the 50-500 with OS is on it's way, but I've not seen any reviews of it yet and who knows, it might be worse than the older ones..

@DazMSmith, @gelu88 & @PB PM regarding rental, I live in Norway and lens rental prices here are absurd, generally you have to pay 1/4 or 1/3 of the selling price for one week (7 days). And since our vacation is about two weeks (5-6 day safari then the rest at the beaches of Zanzibar) I would end up paying about half the price of buying a new, and in my mind that is not acceptable.. I also totally agree with PB PM, in general I do not like renting stuff.

@mb I've read the review and I especially liked the part where he says it is a "Perfect Safari lens". But unfortunatly since renting it seems to not be an option this lens is out of my league.

Posted 3 years ago #
Victor

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 24
offline

BTW I'm currently leaning towards the 300mm f4 and a 1.7 TC. Would that give me a 510mm f6.3 or a 510mm f7.1?

Might also add a Kenko 1.4 since it is so cheap, and then i can switch to 420mm f5.6.

And the converters might be fun on my 70-200 also.

Just thought I'd mention that I'm not a pro and I accept that. I do not expect pro results. I just find photographing fun, I love "gadgets" and new stuff. I have no intention on selling pictures or anything, just for personal use, that's why I can't justify buying/renting something like the 200-400.

Posted 3 years ago #
gelu88

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 295
offline

PB PM said:
I would be cautious about renting gear for a trip. If anything happens to the gear you not only loose your deposit, plus the rental fee, but you also would have to pay replacement fees as well. Yikes.

The prices i quotes all include insurance, so that is not an issue. of course check the fine print to make sure.

@victor, i know how you feel, i'm in canada and most rental places have quite high prices. Luckilly i found a local store in Montreal that has everything i would want for a decent price ($20-$30 for a day) so i'm happy. I had just assumed you were in the states.

Posted 3 years ago #
mb

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,160
offline

Victor said:
BTW I'm currently leaning towards the 300mm f4 and a 1.7 TC. Would that give me a 510mm

It would give you f/6.8 lens that would hardly ever AF.

Posted 3 years ago #
Victor

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 24
offline

@mb So in other words you do not recommend it. Is it just the 1.7 that's too much for the AF, would the 1.4 be fine? I'm kinda thinking that this is Africa and light is not an issue, but I might be way of here, as I have no idea how the light is there. I have a friend that recently came back from Tanzania, and he used a cannon 400 f5.6 and said that he managed fine with it, only a few times he wished for more range, he had a 1.4TC for his 70-200 but he hardly used the 70-200 at all. I kinda wish Nikon had a 400 f5.6 with VR for a reasonable price. I guess the closest I get is 300 f4 with 1.4 TC.

Posted 3 years ago #
Victor

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 24
offline

Hmm if i settle for about 400 mm reach, what would be better:

300mm f4 with 1.4 TC (420mm f5.6)
or
70-200mm f2.8 VR II with the new 2.0 TC (400mm f5.6)

Posted 3 years ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

The 300mm F4 with the 1.4TC will likely have the best overall image quality, but it is also very inflexible. In your situation, I would go for the TC, since you already have the 70-200mm, its kind of a no brainer.

Posted 3 years ago #
Victor

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 24
offline

@PB PM Thanks for the advice, It might be a no brainer for you but not so obvious to me. I have never used TC before.

Since you seem to have experience in use of TC do you also have an opinion about Nikon TC vs Kenko?

I also just noticed that I have forgotten to say that I have two D80s (one is my girlfriends). My initial thought was 70-200 on one body and 150-500 on the other, as I have read that changing of lenses while on safari is not recomended because of all the dust etc. Would you still give the same advice? 70-200 + 2.0 TC on one body and perhaps the 14-24 on the other??

Posted 3 years ago #
Victor

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 24
offline

I just noticed another lens
Sigma 300mm F2.8 APO EX DG HSM
If I eat nothing but noodles until the trip and buy the Kenko 2.0 TC instead of nikon TC I might afford this one. Anyone have any experience with this? Have to read some reviews now..

Posted 3 years ago #
aesnakes

preferred member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 138
offline

Go with the Sigma 150-500 I hand hold that lens all the time, it focuses fast and the zoom at 500mm is amazing and sharp. In my flickr gallery almost all of my close up or bird shots are with that lens hand held at 500 on a D90 which is like 750mm.

Posted 3 years ago #
Newfie

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 186
offline

You have a D80 correct? That means that your 70-200 is actually a 105-300. Use the TC 17 and it becomes a 178-510 f4.5. What more do you want/need?

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

Victor said:
I just noticed another lens
Sigma 300mm F2.8 APO EX DG HSM
If I eat nothing but noodles until the trip and buy the Kenko 2.0 TC instead of nikon TC I might afford this one. Anyone have any experience with this? Have to read some reviews now..

Can't you just buy it and then return it when you get back from the trip?

I know that it's not really all that cool to do, but it's an option if you have a store with good return policy in Norway.

Posted 3 years ago #
kyoshinikon

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 1,200
offline

http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/ProductDetail.page?pid=1996 is the best but is a budget pusher

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

Victor - if You have two d80 I would stick to them, put a wide lens on one and a tele on the other. IMHO 70-200 + TC 17 would be more than enough (if You want more go for the new TC20, either wqy You gonna get better results than from S150-500). As I've wrote before I wouldn't go for prime on safari, especially if it's Your first one as the drivers are going not where You want to go but where they want. Also I would grab a monopod, been bag (therm-a-rest pillow will do the job too, and You'll have some neck support in airplane) and a dust blower (giottos rocket blower is my favourite)

Posted 3 years ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

I agree with adamz, using a prime on safari could be a poor choice, which is why I said that the 300mm F4 AF-S + TC was inflexible. I use the 300mm F4 AF-S a lot, and while it is a great lens, I'd rather have the 70-200mm + TC combo simply because it gives you more flexibility in terms of focal length.

Posted 3 years ago #
Victor

member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 24
offline

@aesnakes I kinda liked the sound of 150-500 myself, but seems that most people do not recommend it.

@Newfie I'm aware of the crop factor and I've heard you can never get enough reach, so I guess that is what I want, more reach. Seems like the general opinion is that TC is the way to go. Thanks for the advice.

@poster I do not have a consciousness to do that. But following that trail of thought I might buy it, use it on safari and then a sell it used. I'll have to think about that.

@kyoshinikon From what I have read it seems the 80-400 is not favored. And looks like most people here recommend me to rather buy a TC for my 70-200.

@adamz Got it, TC before sigma 50-500 or 150-500. I already have a monopod, but I'm not sure I will bring it on the trip, but I will probably bring my tripod for some sunsets. A beanbag on the other hand is a must. We will probably be renting a land-cruiser for ourselves, so we will actually be able to tell the drivers where we want to go, my friend did the same and recommends that. From the pictures I saw of the cars they used, they had pop up roofs, so I think a monopod or tripod would be too cumbersome inside the land-cruiser. I'll have to grab a dust blower. Thanks for the advice!

@PB PM I realize that 300mm f4 + TC Is more inflexible than 70-200mm + TC, but my idea was 70-200 on one body and 300 + TC on the other body. If I go for two Kenko 1.4 TC I could have TC on both lenses for the same price as one Nikon 1.7 TC. That would leave me at 420mm f5.6 in addition to 98-280 f4.0. Plus the DX crop factor.

Thanks a lot for the response guys, I really appreciate it!

Posted 3 years ago #
smarterchild

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 678
offline

Victor- i was on B&H and i saw a 300mm F4 used for 1099 in the used department. Item is a 8+ rating.

Posted 3 years ago #