Safari in Africa - Nikon D3200

<p>Hi,<br /> Im just about to buy my first SLR, a Nikon D3200. Im going to Africa later this year do so a safari, then to Egypt and then around the world, Greece, Italy, Spain, France, England, Ireland, America. <br /> Im very confused about what lenses I should buy. I was looking at getting the AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR with the camera then buying the Nikkor AF-S VR 70-300mm f4.5 - 5.6G IF -ED lens. BUT I went into a store to ask questions today and the salesperson recommended the Tamron 18-270mm F3.5-6.3 Di 11 VC PZD - B008 lens, now i'm so confused. The sales person states that this lens is better than the 18-105 and then I wont have to change lenses all the time. He stated that I won't lose much compared over the 70-300.<br /> Other than the animals in Africa, most of the pictures I take will be lanscapes.<br /> I have no idea, any advice would be appreciated.<br /> Thanks<br /> Cath</p>

I would highly recommend that you get a

two zoom setup rather than one

superzoom. The quality of the two lens

setup is better and each lens still has

enough range that you won't have to

switch often. I think 16-85 VR and 70-

300 VR would work very nicely for you;

for landscape the 16-85 has a very good

reputation. The 18-105 is ok but not

great in my opinion; if you can afford the

16-85 that's what I would prefer.

<p>Don't listen to that salesman, and don't buy from that store. Your choices are far better. Lenses that cover as wide a range as the 18-270mm necessarily entail optical compromises. Consider either a reputable local store (where they won't make those suggestions) if you have one or excellent internet shops like B&H or Adorama. Your trip sounds wonderful. Make sure you are familiar with your camera and lenses before you go.</p>

<p>You cannot really blame the sales guy: often their share on selling a Tamron item is higher than what Nikon gives. So it's in his personal interest to sell Tamron. But indeed he is wrong. I agree with Ilkka, the only serious downside of the 16-85VR is its price, otherwise it is a really excellent lens, especially for landscapes.</p>

<p>And enjoy that trip - sounds terrific!</p>

<p>Thanks for your quick responses. Will have a look at the price of the 16-85 VR. Im planning on doing some walking tours around Sydney where a photographer gives lots of advice and instructions on how to take photos and use your camera, as well as getting out and about taking a whole heap of photos before I leave to get familiar with the camera.<br>

Thanks again. </p>

<p>My local camera store (in northern California) likes to recommend Tamron super zooms to their customers also. I would imagine that they get a higher profit selling Tamron lenses. Unfortunately, with the D3200, it cannot auto focus property with any lens that is below f5.6 in its maximum aperture. That is why there is no Nikon AF lens that is below f5.6 in any part of their zoom range. That f6.3 on the Tamron 18-270 is a major no no.</p>

<p>If I were you, I would not return to that camera store. They are putting their interest over yours. They deserve to make some money to stay in business, but not by steering you to something not quite right.</p>

<p>You are going on a long trip. I know weight is definitely a concern, but I would bring at least 2 to 3 lenses so that you have some back up in case one fails. I would consider a camera backup strategy also. In particular, it is dusty in Africa. Protect your equipment carefully in safari. I have had a 500mm/f4 lens' aperture jammed in Kenya.</p>

<p>The other important point is that on the safari trip, assuming this is the kind of safari where you drive around mainly on the roads and take photos from the vehicles, is going to be intensive on the long zoom. You can expect to spend a lot of time at 300mm (and if you have it, more). So consider that you may need to choose a lens which has good performance at the 300mm+ point.<br>

I personally would also take two bodies to avoid swapping lenses. But that's because I have two bodies anyway. The first time I went on a safari, I used only a long lens on the DSLR and for (the small minority of) wide shots I used a compact camera.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>You cannot really blame the sales guy: often their share on selling a Tamron item is higher than what Nikon gives.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm not suggesting Cathy blame the sales guy, only that it would be better for her to avoid a store with a salesman that tries to talk her into a less useful choice than the one she was already making.</p>

<p>And I agree that the 16-85mm is a better than the 18-105mm, albeit more expensive choice, not only for quality, but because a 2mm difference in focal length makes a difference at the wide end.</p>

<p>Out of curiosity, I have just checked photozone.de charts for the 18-105, 16-85 and the Tamron.</p>

<p>The best of the Tamron "start at the worst" of the Nikkor, so it is way behind... the maximun resolution score in the Tamron only rise the 2450 lp bar at 18mm/f5.6-8, while on the Nikkor you have to go to the extreme of the zoom (105mm) to be under this level. I have used the Nikkor a couple times, and it seemed me better than I`d have expected.</p>

<p>The Tamron is a real consumer type cheaposuperzoom, with all its drawbacks. We cannot expect it to be better, it`s made to make seller`s profit. Photozone gives a score of 1.5 out of 5 (optically), while the 18-105 receives 3 points (out of 5). </p>

<p>The 16-85 beat this "psychological bar" at every focal lenght, and with noticeably lower distortion levels, even at the widest setting.</p>

<p>Agree with the others... look for another store.</p>

<p>Let me just add my support for the above. I do not think that the 18-105 is that bad but the 16-85 is certainly better. I have to assume that money is an issue so I won't recommend the dream team. You might want to add the 50 mm F/1.8 to your kit as a backup. It is tack sharp and about $100.00. It will fit in your pocket so no weight problem. </p>

<p>Don't rule out the 18-200 VRII. It is convenient, very good and about the same price as the 16-85. You might think that overlapping that with the 70-300 VR does not make sense but it will reduce the number of times you swap lenses considerably. And if you should have a problem with the 70-300 it will be just fine in a pinch. You won't miss much.</p>

<p>I agree that a backup body would be nice but as a practical matter they sell cameras all over the world. If it is affordable the second body is always a nice convenience especially as for important side trips you can have both of your lenses mounted at the same time. </p>

<p>What's wrong with the kit lens 18-55mm VR that comes with the camera? That's a pretty good landscape lens. Then you can focus on a nice tele zoom such as the 70-200mm F4 or the 80-400mm depending on your budget.</p>

<p>Or get the great (and cheap) 18-70mm.</p>

<p>I've been thinking about this same thing Cathy. I'm especially interested in the safari part. I found the

following a few months back and stashed the links for later reference. It's a bunch of blog posts by a

photographer that was there for a few weeks. She shows a lot of shots and they all contain captions

that tell you the body and lens she used. Her shots are pretty diverse too. She has some landscape,

environmental, night, mammals, birds, and I think I remember seeing a lizard. Maybe this can help you

shape your kit or at least set your expectations. Good luck! --Wade<br>

</p>

 

<p><a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-the-adventure-begins-with-a-kiss-from-a-

giraffe/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-the-adventure-begins-with-a-kiss-from-a-giraffe/</a>

<br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-nairobi-to-samburu-national-

reserve/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-nairobi-to-samburu-national-reserve/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-samburu-national-preserve-day-

1/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-samburu-national-preserve-day-1/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-samburu-national-preserve-day-

2/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-samburu-national-preserve-day-2/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-samburu-national-preserve-day-

3/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-samburu-national-preserve-day-3/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-samburu-national-

reserve/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-samburu-national-reserve/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/night-sky-at-

manzanita/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/night-sky-at-manzanita/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-samburu-to-lake-

nakuru/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-samburu-to-lake-nakuru/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-lake-nakuru-national-

park/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-lake-nakuru-national-park/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-lake-bogoria/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-

blog/kenya-lake-bogoria/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-lake-bogoria-2/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-

blog/kenya-lake-bogoria-2/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-a-

crossing/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-a-crossing/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-the-mara-

triangle/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-the-mara-triangle/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-the-mara-triangle-

2/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-the-mara-triangle-2/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-here-kitty-

kitty/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-here-kitty-kitty/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-close-encounters-of-the-cheetah-

kind/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-close-encounters-of-the-cheetah-kind/</a>

<br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-big-cats-in-

bw/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-big-cats-in-bw/</a><br>

<a href="http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-the-final-

days/">http://laurieexcell.com/lauries-blog/kenya-masai-mara-the-final-days/</a></p>

<p>Hector, if my post seemed to address you, the "you cannot blame him" was meant far more generic - my apologies!</p>

<p>Rick, the $100 version of the 50mm f/1.8 will not AF on a D3200, and the 50mm focal length isn't exactly an allround useful length on APS-C sensors. I wouldn't recommend it as a next purchase, the 35 f/1.8DX is better is every way. But both of them are not really lenses that seem immediately useful for a safari anyway. And, personally, I would also never get the 18-200VR over a 18-105, it's optically simply not as good - 2 lenses just give better performance for roughly the same money. The combination of a 18-55VR with a 55-300VR is optically also really quite good - the build quality is a lot less than the other lenses mentioned, but otherwise it won't disappoint.</p>

<p>I am thinking of the safari part. You need decent sharpness at the long focal end to capture satisfactory animal images. Typically super zooms are not good at the long end. </p>

<p>I think Ilkka's suggestion of the 16-85 + 70-300VR is a good combination. </p>

<p>Sounds like you will have a great fun trip! Enjoy! :)</p>

<p>I actually take anyone else's opinion with a large grain of salt. I read over and over how the such and such lens or camera is not good because of this or that, but when I bought a Nikon AF-S 18-135mm 3.5-4.5 a few years ago as a snapshot lens, I was more than pleasantly surprised at how good the photos looked, despite all the negative comments about the lens. (I even dropped the camera once right on the front edge of the lens and there was no major damage.) After saying that, I had the Nikon 70-300 VR and mine was excellent, even out to 300mm.</p>

<p>I cast another vote for the 16-85 VR. I have shot in Egypt and it was ideal there for the things you are most likely going to want to capture. I have not been to the southern parts of Africa or on safari. The 16-85 is a tad pricey but you are going to want quality images on a trip like this and this lens will deliver. It is one of the best purchases I have ever made. Let us know what you decide.</p>

<p>-Cheers</p>

<p>I'd add my votes on the pile for the 16-85VR and the 70-300mm VR. I took both those lenses and a 200-400mm f4 to India, with a D300 and D3 body combo.<br>

The 16-85 is amazing for the price and only really looses out in noticeable sharpness and contrast to pro Nikons triple the price.<br>

Below is the link to my Photo.net India gallery; every landscape and the Taj shots were with those 2 lenses listed above. The tigers got the heavy duty 200-400. <br>

<a href="/photodb/folder?folder_id=1026328">http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=1026328</a></p>

 

<p>I recently went on a safari in South Africa and there are many things to think about. One body/lens combination I took with a Sony Nex5n with a 18-200mm f3.5-63 and the second body was a D800 with the Nikkor 200-400 f4 VRII lens. On my blog, I list the issues that I pondered for about a year before I went at http://www.e2photo.net/blog/safari-in-south-africa.html. You can also see some of the pictures I was able to obtain with that gear solution.<br>

I don't know how much the trip is going to cost you. For me, I considered our trip a once in a life time experience so I was willing to invest in gear as a small part of the cost of the trip. <br>

Also consider renting gear rather than purchasing it. </p>

<p>That salesman is a little off. I would say the best DX travel kit would be the 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 VR, the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR, and the 35mm f/1.8. Each of these lenses will work extremely well with your D3200, and this gives you everything you need with great image quality that's pretty hard to surpass unless you start shooting for really expensive equipment. But again this is my opinion. Others may feel differently. I would personally stay away from super zooms...especially third party super zooms.</p>

<p>Thanks guys for all your feedback. I think I will go with the 16-85 VR and the 70-300 VR. Its more than I wanted to spend, but it is a trip of a lifetime, and the person i'm going with probably wont take many photos.<br>

Just one more question, is it too risky to be buying lenses from Hong Kong. Obviously they are much cheaper but i'm worried about the warranty. In Australia, where everything is more expensive, the 16-85 VR is between $750 and $850 and the 70-300 VR is between $700 and $750. I can get the 16-85 VR for $540 and 70-300 VR for $430 from Hong Kong.<br>

Thanks again for all the advice.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Just one more question, is it too risky to be buying lenses from Hong Kong.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As long as you know what you are doing, it is not risky at all to buy lenses in Hong Kong. However, I should disclose that I grew up in Hong Kong and speak the local dialect perfectly; therefore, I am very comfortable there although I left over 30 years ago. English is also widely spoken there so that you should have few problems.</p>

<p>Nikon Hong Kong has a web site with recommended dealers: http://www.nikon.com.hk/en_HK/dealers.page?<br>

I would stick with those recommended ones. In particular, in the Central District on Hong Kong Island, there is a small street called Stanley Street, just one block up the hill parallel to Queen's Road Central. There is a high concentration of good camera stores there. There are also a lot of camera stores in the Mong Kok (which means busy corner) area on the Kowloon side. That area is indeed super crowded. Keep in mind that they prefer cash over there and may charge you a higher price for credit cards.</p>

<p>If you are going to be in Hong Kong for a short period, I would test those lenses carefully before you leave.</p>

<p>BTW, I was back in Hong Kong for a week about 3 months ago and I stopped by Nikon Hong Kong's office. However, I didn't buy any cameras there, since prices are similar to those in the US. I would check prices at Adorama, B&H, etc. If it is somehow a lot cheaper than those in the US and it is not from an authorized dealer, I would pass.</p>

<p>Cathy, you are getting good advice here. </p>

<p>My experience on Safari: You'll want a long lens with image stabilization; I took all my shots at the long end. You'll see great things. Enjoy.</p>

<p>One more thing: It was very helpful to me to go out and practice in the park before leaving on the trip. Make your mistakes and make your adjustments shooting squirrels and pigeons at home before you get over there.</p>

<p>I have the D3100, which uses the same battery, and my first piece of advice is that with any of these smaller-battery-equipped cameras (D3100, D5100, D3200, D5200) then you really need some extra batteries in your bag; consider picking up 2-3 more. The mAh rating is about half of what higher-end cameras such as the D7000 have.</p>

<p>As for lenses, the 18-105mm is a better lens than the Tamron 18-270mm. He just wanted to sell you a lens that would earn him more commission. The 18-105mm is one of Nikon's better midrange zooms, with your most reasonable step up being the 16-85mm VR that everyone is mentioning to you. Rick, I would DEFINITELY rule out the 18-200mm lens. It's noticeably worse than the 18-105mm lens, and is DEFINITELY worse than the telephoto lenses that cover the same range such as the 55-200mm VR, 55-300mm VR, 70-300mm VR, etc. And as others have mentioned, the 50mm doesn't autofocus on lower-end cameras. If anything the 35mm f/1.8G is a best first prime lens to pick up, as it has a rather natural perspective and is cheap. But, I agree with Wouter that these primes are all of limited use on a safari, and shouldn't be worried about until the safari is over.</p>

<p>As for shooting in the telephoto range, a dedicated telephoto lens like the 70-300mm VR that you mention beats the pants off of a superzoom lens like the 18-270mm. You just can't get around those pesky laws of physics: the larger zoom range you try to cram into a lens, the worse the lens is going to perform, unless you make some very serious compromises such as making it astronomically expensive and large/heavy. However, the Tamron 70-300mm VC is known for performing a little better than the Nikon version that you mention. It is also a little cheaper, which is nice, because it frees up some of that money for the 16-85mm. So, pick up a 16-85mm, whichever 70-300mm you prefer, and happy shooting! Also, go get some practice under your belt, you don't want to be learning and making mistakes on your once in a lifetime shots. Pick up your gear as early as possible.</p>

<p>The 16-85mm and 70-300mm is a very good set. It's versatile and will give good image quality. I would add a good camera case that seals up tightly, and at least three spare batteries. I was on a trip to a foreign country once and realized I didn't have enough batteries. It's a major pain in the butt and you can't depend on recharging every night either.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>