sschonfeld

I am planning safari next year with tamron 18-400. Have had great results so far from butterflies to elk. Enlargements with excellent resolution. Agree with second body.

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

I suggest the rental of a 200-500 Nikon. It is an excellent lens and has the reach you need. I used a Sigma 150-500 on my safari before I had the Nikon and can say positively the range was right but the images will be sharper with the Nikon. It's really expensive to do a redo.

NormanTheGr8 Loc: Racine, Wisconsin

Check out Wildlife photography podcast done by Gerry Van Der Walt from Wild-Eye in South Africa (also on you tube )
http://www.wild-eye.co.za/

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

You will be good with what you have. The guides get you so close a 200mm will be plenty for most shots and 18mm is nice and wide. Pack light and have fun, Africa is a blast! Cheers!

regularguy55

Many good suggestions. I’ve reduced the size and numbers of equipment items so as to better enjoy travel. For this trip I would take my Lumix FZ1000, 2.8-4, 25-400mm, great EVF bridge camera. Not at all bulky and takes great photos. Safari probably will present some opportunities for pix past the 400 range but this lens should handle 90%+ of your needs and enable you to enjoy more of the event. Enjoy your trip.

Traveller_Jeff

When I started to read this, I was going to suggest the 18-200mm. However, for the distance shot - the one of an animal pretty far away, I'd go with the Tamron 150-600 Zoom. It's the biggest lens that can still be hand-held for a good shot. Here's one - I was about 300 feet from this Hawk. The one following was of a baby hawk hopping around my deck about 15 feet away. The same focal range in Nikon is far more expensive. The Tamron is good, but won't break the bank.

NormanTheGr8 Loc: Racine, Wisconsin

I love that lens for a walk-around in good light , but it can get a little soft in less than perfect light. I think in this instance I would want to go with my Canon 100-400 L II, 1.4 extender And a Fast Quality Wide Angle .
If your going to be in a dusty/dryer time the 18-400 could suck up a lot of dust where the better glass should be a bit better sealed.

CJ2

Tanzania 3 months ago - 2 fuji x-t2s, wide zoom in the bag, 50-150mm on one body. Rented 100-400 on second body. 1.5 multiplier. Still had to crop most images to get exactly what I wanted even at 400mm (600mm 35 mm equivalent). Would have added a more but did not feel like reducing the jpgs for this. This should give you some idea of what focal lengths will work and some of the crops were extensive.

So, whatever you take with you, glass is everything - mediocre glass will give u mediocre results. And unless u are living in Africa, if u miss anything u can't walk to your back door and shoot it again.

CJ

CJ2

Forgot to add, the 50-140mm broke on day 2 (probably my fault - lens came apart from the coupling to the Fujis) so 95% was shot with the 100-400mm - great Lens.

cam.79 Loc: Gray, GA

I am just an amateur that likes to take photos. I have to work with a low budget. I shoot with a Nikon D3000 and Nikon P900. In your situation, I would take what you have and buy/rent/borrow a P900 or P1000. Your long shots may not be museum quality or even showable, but you would get the shot that others in the Jeep did not see at all. That is just my 1.25 cents (Told you I was on a low budget).

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

VR supposedly is about 3 stops compensation and VR II is supposedly about 4 stops. As far as lenses go, if I was going on a photography vacation I'd take a whole host of lenses and need a 2nd large backpack for all the gear. If I was traveling light, I'd go with a DX body and the Tamron 18-400mm f3.5-5.6 and a couple of fast primes, something wide for landscapes (actually I'd take my Sigma 10-20mm f3.5) and a nifty fifty f/1.4. The shot below was taken with the Tamron 18-400mm.

(Download)

User ID

OTOH too many users with no long lens skills are
wishing that they had a longer lens for those far
away shots, but are blissfully ignorant of the poor
results that unpracticed users can get with much
more than about 200mm to work with. Some will
fare better than others. Some will be happy with
whatever result they manage, for better or worse.
There's some hawk portraits about 7 posts above
which exemplify this phenomenon. The user has
recommended the huge long lens that he'd used,
but the resulting image recommends against it.
So much depends on each user's expectations.

I'm just saying that where distances are involved,
novices are prone to wishing they'd brought more
FL without realizing that FL in and of itself will not
perform minor miracle. IOW regrets are misplaced.

Also, your driver and your territory are variables.
In some areas, a driver gets you "too close", right
into 24-105 range. My brother's wife made a face
to face shot of a cheetah with her tiny P&S. The
cat was sitting on the hood and she was riding in
the "copilot" seat. For that driver in that preserve
this was no big deal.


.

Traveller_Jeff

Now, THAT giraffe shot is just plain great! Congrats. Was that at full 400mm? Did you crop and expand or was it full frame?

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

Went back and looked at it in Lightroom: Nikon D7200, ISO280, 400mm (600mm 35mm equivalent), f/6.3, 1/640 sec, handheld, no cropping, but sharpening and contrast adjustment. Here's another from the same shoot. The 18-400mm is not for everyone, and for sure, not for every shoot, but I'm impressed with the results when it is appropriate.

(Download)

wetreed

The best lens to take would be the Tamron 18- 400 . It has twice the reach of 200 and is still wide for landscapes.