Single DSLR-Acceptable Risk

<p>We are leaving in two months for a 16 day trip to southern Africa. Five of the 16 days will be on safari, the remainder either in transit with a London layover, or doing general tourist stuff. </p>

<p>I'm in serious conflict whether or not to take a second DSLR (either a D7000 or D300) or not. The D7000 is my usual travel camera, the D300 the backup. I'm not excited about the extra weight given a chronic bad back. Normally, I only take the D300 on car trips, where weight is not a factor. I also have a rugged pocket point and shoot for additional backup and walking around stuff.</p>

<p>The lens selection is settled, which will be the Nikon 16-85 and 70-300VR.</p>

<p>I appreciate your inputs.</p>

 

<p>Depends entirely on how vital taking pics is. You have a phone, I assume? Personally, I never take a back up, although my traveling companion has a camera. If I really felt I was missing a camera I would probably buy something cheap and cheerful locally if I could. I am sure most people responding to this thread will not agree with me.</p>

<p>Agree totally with Robin. Since you've got backups, one wouldn't take up that much room. The fact that you're concerns tell me that you should take a backup.</p>

<p>If the D300 is uncomfortable heavy, would it make sense to replace it with a D3000something?<br>

Personally I am feeling not comfortable with single DSLRs (although none of mine let me down entirely so far). - But one of my reasons to avoid them is the sensor dust issue; I rather have just 2 lens changes /day: to walk around zooms in the morning and back to primes when its getting darker. <br>

In general I believe a lens is more likely to fail than a body. <br>

I'd try to sink the backup body in the wheeled stay at home suitcase, if I was you but would use it during the safari.</p>

<p>Robin's right, that's not what I do , though I suspect that what I do is driven by the fact I keep the last "main" camera to use as a backup. I don't carry it though. Its in my suitcase /checked baggage /hotel /car but it is never in my camera bag not least because I make it a principle to use a camera bag just big enough for the things I will use and not big enough for the things I only might. OTOH whilst I'd tend to feel inadequate with only a compact in the event of breakdown, maybe one should consider how you'd cope if it were a lens that malfunctioned or went missing rather than a body, where the compact gives you protection and a spare dslr wouldn't. That has happened to me- my main walkaround zoom stopped working on a trip. I was saved by the fact I carry 3 zooms , but you wouldn't be. </p>

While is highly unlikely that anything will go wrong with your primary camera, for a trip like this, I would take a

backup if possible even though it will just sit in luggage for 16 days. If you are taking a short flight to your

safari location, it may make sense to check for any weight restrictions on that flight.

<p>Maybe this does not apply, but I use FF camera and if I was facing a safari, I'd have a second rig with me....just to make sure I don't need to change lenses in dusty environment and to gain more reach (like D7200).</p>

<p>Les</p>

Take your point and shoot or replace it with the Nikon Coolpix P900.

 

Why the P900? The zoom range. I haven't gone on safari but my understanding is that the larger the zoom range the

more photographic opportunities will present themselves and at the long end the P900's lens is the equivalent if a

2000mm lens on a full frame camera, and the photos I've seen from friends who have a P900 the image quality is

impressive.

 

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/compact-digital-cameras/coolpix-p900.html#tab-ProductDetail-

ProductTabs-Overview

<p>All depends on how keen a photographer you are, and how likely you are to do an African trip again. I would bring both my FX cameras and several lenses. Last photo trip to a place I have been before, and will visit again, I brought one FX body and two lenses, but also a very small and capable mirorless. I used that camera once, then only because I had brought an IR modified module. Though it was lighter and smaller, and left extra space in my camera bag, the saving was not important. I find it easier to switch back and forth between similar cameras. As to phones...not to my taste as cameras.</p>

<p>I agree Ellis re: using zoom bridge camera as a backup, although the Nikon P900 (899g) is actually heavier than a D300 body (825g) -- but that reach!!!!</p>

<p>I was the guy back in the day the never went into the field without at least two Nikon Fs, a Hasselblad and a half dozen lenses. Cameras have become so much more reliable today I travel with only two cameras -- my D 7000 and my iPhone 6s. I frequently will find myself choosing the iPhone as the primary. My phone is a better camera than almost any I have owned in 65 years of taking pictures.</p>

<p>E.J. , Sorry dude -- I have only been taking photos since the early - mid 50's, but I have to use a camera without a viewfinder for my part time job, and unless the light is just right, it is guess, snap, and let the camera do the work. Oh, yeah, you can't even "chimp" till you get out of the sun. Across all conditions any camera I own will beat a phone (granted, I am fortunate to have excellent cameras). I will admit, under ideal conditions they can produce some good images in expert hands. They aren't as flexible as cameras, and I don't care carry one, it lives in the truck.</p>

<p>Been in similar situations. Took a Sony RX100 as backup. A second body that would take the same lenses would have its advantages, but I thought the likelihood of needing the backup very small. As is that Sony.</p>

<p>Personally, I'd as Robin does. So far (knock on wood) my gear has always turned out reliable, my back isn't happy with large heavy bags and my income doesn't depend on those photos, so if I miss some, so be it. A pity, but not the end of the world. The idea of a bridge camera as backup is worth considering though.</p>

<p>Thank you all. This is not a dedicated photo tour, I just want to document the trip and (hopefully) get some really good shots along the way. We'll be traveling in a small group of people with varying degrees of interest in photography. </p>

<p>The genesis of my question is from expedition to the local (DC) zoo, which has a lot of up-and-down. I carried the full load as described in the original posting, and my back was very sore for two days afterwards. Also, several years ago I carried the D7000 and two zooms on a trip which included short excursions in Tierra del Fuego and Patagonia, and didn't miss having a second body.</p>

<p>I have been wearing a fully loaded camera backpack while doing my morning walk or treadmill workout. Today I took out the D300 but left everything else in its place, and I really noticed the difference.</p>

<p>I think it depends how vital are the photos for you. In 2005 while visiting the Grand Cayon my newest camera ( Canon 20d ) failed while my older "backup' camera ( Canon 10d ) saved the day for me. I just came from a 12 day excursion in Italy and I took a Canon 7d mark ll with the 18-135mm stm IS lens and for a backup my compact Leica type 109. After a day's shooting I found myself strollling with the Leica during the evening.</p>

<p> Jose Garcia</p>

<p>Sandy, you might give it a try. The latest generation iPhones and Samsung phones are incredible cameras. I've been digital since the first D-1 and have about a million digital images. Some of the best are from my latest iPhone -- I too, have solid (though now two models old) Nikon gear. There are photos I can take with the phone that my Nikon cannot touch.</p>

<p>For me the ideal would be an RX100 or similar camera as Marc mentions. Mainly for candid/snapshot opportunities, not as a true backup. The rationale is that a compact is easier to deploy than a DSLR.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>...my back was very sore for two days afterwards...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Me too. That's why I changed from carrying one DSLR to carrying zero. Switched to Micro 4/3. World of difference. One opportunity you have that you don't with a DLSR is to have your backup body be very small, as Micro 4/3 cameras come in all sizes, and some of them are pocketable.</p>