Looks like you have done your homework. I would skip the monopod--it will be too unwieldy in this environment.

I live in Kenya mostly, and I always travel with two full-frame bodies (Sony A7III and A7RIII) and two full-frame lenses (24-105mm and 100-400mm.) I have plenty of primes, but they don't make the cut when I go on safari. I am happy with this kit, although occasionally I wish I had a little more reach. I have a 1.4x extender, but putting it on in the field won't always work. With your 100-400mm APS-C you should have enough reach.

Taking both the Tamron 100-400mm (4.5-6.3) and 18-400mm (3.5-6.3) seems like overkill. I do not know these lenses. I would take the one that gives you the better image quality in the 100-400mm range (this is definitely where IQ matters) and put that on the better of your cameras, definitely the D7200. You said yourself that you probably should put the 100-400 on the D7200, and this seems like the best option.

You don't mention a standard zoom--you might be able to pick up a good used one before your trip. You probably will not need an ultra-wide lens, but going to at least 24mm full-frame equivalent (16mm APS-C) would be nice. There will be ample opportunities to take great landscape shots, and often animals will be too close for a telephoto lens. In my D7100 days, I used a 18-140mm lens (although not for safaris); it was a decent lens but not outstanding.

Good luck, and enjoy your safari.

I have not been to Botswana. I would check the local rainfall patterns. Here in Kenya where I live you get discounts during rainy season. Dirt roads in Africa easily get impassable when it rains hard. So I would check for that.

I assume that you are talking about old Sony lenses for the Sony/Minolta A-mount--which has been defunct for a number of years.

Sony E-mount lenses (like the 100-400mm and the 200-600mm under discussion here) cannot be used on a Nikon "D" (presumably F-mount) because the Sony E-mount requires a flange focal distance of 18mm while the Nikon F-mount has a flange focal distance of 46.5mm. You can put a Sony E-mount lens on a Nikon Z-mount body, however, as the flange focal distance is 16mm--which gives an adapter 2mm to work with.

This definitely is not true. The 100-400 is a GM (red badge) while the 200-600mm is a G (black badge). The GM is generally considered the professional line. However, Sony produces a number of very good G lenses. I am not telling which they are otherwise I might be banned from this site as well.

I have been struggling with the same question--I have owned the Sony 100-400mm GM for over two years, and last year added the 1.4x teleconverter. I decided against the Sony 200-600mm lens for practical reasons: it is too large and heavy for my style of photography. I carry my equipment on long walks, and I shoot hand-held.

I always put my 100-400mm lens on the Sony A7RIII (I also own a A7III) which gives me the opportunity to crop. Sometimes I use Clear Image Zoom to extend the reach. (Your focusing ability is limited with CIZ--tracking is not an option.) And I find that the 1.4x converter does not degrade the IQ in a significant way. So I am happy with my current set-up.

Having said that, I too am curious to hear from people who have truly compared this set-up with the Sony 200-600mm.

As long as your devices are rated for 110 to 240 Volts (tablets, laptops, cameras, cell phones) you do not need a "voltage adapter." You just need an adapter plug.

You are correct that in Kenya, where I live, Type G (the UK standard) is the only plug in use. The same is mostly true for Tanzania. Type D (India) is being phased out. You are unlikely to encounter it at tourist spots.

Let's consider the question OP posed:

"I have a Sony A7rii and plan an overseas trip this summer. Do any such Sony users have a good travel lens suggestion? I would like wide to long capability."

I stand by my answer that the Sony 24-105 really is that lens. I have owned this lens for five years, and I have traveled with this lens on four continents. So I know what it can do, and what it can't.

While I have taken great bird shots at 105mm, this is not a lens for birding. For that you might take a Sony 200-600mm lens.

When I visit European cities, I take the Zeiss Batis 18mm for church interiors and the Sony 24-105mm for everything else. When I shoot in Nairobi (I live just outside Nairobi) I take my tiny Sony Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 lens--the perfect street lens. When I travel in the Alps I definitely also take my Sony 100-400mm GM lens because I love these long landscape shots that isolate details. When I am on safari--safari being the Swahili word for trip or travel--I always take two bodies--the A7III with the Sony 24-105mm (for landscapes and animals that are close enough) and the A7RIII with the Sony 100-400 GM, often with a 1.4x extender.

In all these travel configurations, the 24-105mm lens is the centerpiece. I often take other lenses to complement its abilities. But if OP looks for a general and versatile travel lens for an overseas trip, the 24-105mm is it. Yes, you could take a superzoom (like the Sony 24-240mm or the Tamron 50-400mm) but you will make serious compromises in image quality.

A lot of folks here are retired and are into group travel. I do not know if that is the case for OP. In that scenario, you want a one-and-done lens. If you travel with others, they may not give you the time to change lenses frequently. So you want to take a lens that can do 95% of the shots, and the Sony 24-105mm is that lens. You call it assumptions, I call it experience.

The Sony 24-105 mm lens is the best travel lens. In my opinion, the focal range is perfect for travel, and the IQ is superb. Mine has been to four continents, and it has always performed. It has been through a number of mishaps but has never given up. For general travel and landscape photography you need at least 24mm. lf you want a little wider I would get the Sony 20-70mm..

The Sony RX 100 certainly is a capable travel camera. That does not mean that this is the only way to travel.

I think that fears of traveling in "Third-World countries" are greatly overblown. I have traveled extensively in Latin America and Africa (as well as North America and Europe) without problems. I always travel with my Sony full-frame gear. I have a great camera kit to take pictures, not to allow it to collect dust on my shelf at home.

You have to be mindful of your environment wherever you are. Yes, I watch my stuff when photographing in Nairobi, but I do the same in Prague or Rome. Places where lots of tourists go always pose an increased risk. While I have not been to India yet, I plan to travel there in the next couple of years. And I definitely will bring my best gear.

This would be true for a full-frame camera body. However, the 70D is a crop-sensor body. With the Canon crop factor of 1.6, the 24-105mm lens de facto does not open wider than 38mm. Therefore, I definitely would take the 11-20mm lens (full frame equivalent 18-32mm).

I am excited about all the innovation in cameras and lenses. Mirrorless technology fundamentally changed photography, in a good way. Other innovation is more akin to gimmickry that most of us will never need. We therefore can safely ignore most of it, except for those of us afflicted by GAS. Many of the important innovations eventually trickle down to consumer-level photography, which is why innovation has a benefit for all of us.

We all have choices. I switched to mirrorless when the Sony A7III came out almost six years ago. This was a game-changer for me. Sony has come up with many newer models since, with more bells and whistles. Yet, the innovation is incremental at best. The Sony A7III still fully meets my needs, so I have never felt the need to upgrade.

My take on this: innovation is good as all of us can benefit. But we do not need most of it to take great photos. We can choose what we need and ignore the rest.

I agree. The 24-105mm is a great travel lens, but on an APS-C body it is not wide enough. The 11-20mm lens will get you the wider shots. The nifty fifty will be too long on an APS-C bodo to be useful; the same with the telephoto lens. Enjoy your trip!

[quote=travelwp][quote=gwilliams6]I recently traded it in and upgraded to 61mp A7RV

That is an interesting question--lenses should have MP ratings. Lower quality glass cannot provide the resolution that a 61 MP sensor requires, which means that upgrading to 61 MP makes no sense unless you have quality glass that can handle this.

Sony Alpha Blog developed a chart that offers something like MP ratings for lenses. They rate the suitability of all full-frame lenses for the Sony E-mount for their ability to provide good resolution for a 61 MP camera body.
https://sonyalpha.blog/2019/11/10/which-lenses-to-maximise-the-potential-of-the-sony-a7riv/

"Traveling light" is the way to go, provided that you have the right equipment. The Sony A7RIII with the Sony 20-70mm f/4 lens is that right equipment: great quality, perfect focal range for this type of trip--and for most trips, really. As I have noted before, f/4 will be just fine for this trip.

OP will be part of an "organized tour," meaning that there usually won't be much time to get the shot, meaning that changing lenses often is not practical--aside from the risk of getting dust on your sensor in the streets of Florence. Primes are great if you have the time and place (like sitting in a church pew) to change lenses. Having a simple kit with the right lens therefore is important. The Sony 20-70 mm is that lens.

Taking a monopod is a bad idea. There won't be time and often space to set it up. Most places where a monopod would be useful, like church interiors, won't allow them, partly for crowd control reasons, and partly because they could damage old wooden or marble floors.

I travel with a Sony A7III and/or A7RIII. My standard travel lens for the past five years has been the Sony 24-105mm, another f/4 lens. I have taken many great night shots in European cities at ISO 5000. I find f/4 fast enough for just about any travel shots. For church interiors I use both the Sony 24-105mm and the Zeiss Batis 18mm. If I had the 20-70 I might leave the Batis at home. In my experience, 35mm would not be wide enough for interior shots. With or without the Batis 18mm, you have a great travel kit.