Do "I" Need a Telephoto Lens for a Safari?

[roberto_lins]

Hi all,

 

Although I used to do some nature photography in the past, my

interests have changed a bit. In the mean time I got rid of my

100-300/4.5-5.6 and 300/4L. In the last years the longest lens I've

been using is a 100mm (on 35mm). Recently, I picked up a digital body.

Croping factor taking into account the longest I'd have would be a

160mm equivalent.

 

Ok, here is the problem. In two weeks I'll go to Africa. There, I'll

spend a few days in a safari. Since it's my first safari, I have no

clue how close does one get to the animals. Will the 160mm equiv. be

enough for some sort of "enviromental portraiture of the animals"? I

don't care about geting tight, just close enough to get their full

bodies into the surrounding environment.

 

I'm not interest on zooms or big lenses, so I thought about getting a

200/2.8L (320/2.8 equiv. on the digital body!). However, it's a bit of

money for the use it'll have afterwards. Rental in not an option for me.

 

Thanks for your time,

 

Roberto

[ross_warner1]

You're pretty limited with a short lens on safari. However, my wife took the shots at the

top of this page with a Canon point-and-shoot Z115 camera, which has a 35-115mm

lens:

 

http://rosswarner.com/bw.html

 

However, compare these with the pictures I took, mostly with 600mm, 400mm, and

teleconverters:

 

http://rosswarner.com/safari.shtml<div></div>

[ben z]

African Safari is still on my to-do list, but as for if you can't rent the lens you want, buy one used and sell it when you get back. You won't lose much if anything, probably a lot less than a rental for that length of time. Canon EF and Nikon AF lenses aren't dropping in price like others because those companies have DSLRs everyone wants.

[ShunCheung]

If the objective of your safari is to photograph wildlife in Africa, you will be extremely frustrated unless you have some long lenses. Even with a 1.6x DSLR, I would say a 300mm/f4 is the minimal I would bring. A 80-200mm type lens is probably sufficient for elephants because they are huge.

<P>

Even though <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/nature/kenya.html"> my article</A> is now a bit out of date, hopefully it can provide you some useful information.

[marshall]

With a 160 and a bit of luck, you'd be able to get some decent shots, but you won't fill the frame with anything but the larger and less skittish wildlife. There were a few times this summer that I got full-frame lion shots with an 80-200 (on film), but that is not the norm.

[alex_lofquist]

Collectively I have spent about 3 1/2 months in Kenya. On the first trip the longest lens that I had was a 200mm. The next time I brought a 70-210 and a 400mm, and sometimes that wasn't enough! If money is a real object, consider getting a 400 f/5.6. A used Sigma ought to be available for under $300.

 

As to how close you may get, consider that you most likely will omly see leopards high in a tree and that you should really need something in the 400-500mm length. For birds, you will want something a bit longer. Some parks will restrict you to established roads and who knows what you will need. I once saw a family of cheetahs about 100yards away, but could only observe them with my binocs. Even when near to the subject, consider that closeups of the subject can be much more drammatic than the normal "tourist" shots.

 

I would also suggest an extra camera body, compatable with your lenses. I was fortunate to have a backup body on my first trip when the shutter on my primary body failed (even though I had just had it repaired before travelling.)

 

I feel tha skimping on lenses or camera for an African safari is false economy.

[lars]

As a freelance safari guide working for a danish company leading trips in Africa, I have some experience on this matter. You MAY get close enough with your 160mm 135 format equivalent lens, but you cannot be sure. Many times I find my 400mm (135) too long, and I wish I could afford the new 200-400mm Zoom-Nikkor. Sadly, most safari drivers do not respect the common (Kenya) safari codes of maintaing at least 20 m to wildlife and not going off the tracks. Their main motivation is to give their client the "best" wildlife viewing experience as possible as it may be mirrored in the size of the tip at the end of trip. Most visitors will not be aware of the safari codes and since everyone else is doing the same, it is quickly being accepted as the normal way to behave. One solution might be to have a rule that the codes should be visibly posted inside the safari vehicles. Sadly, there will always be offenders off cause. Finally, my lens advice; with your crop factor, I would get a 70(80)-200 zoom.

[jreades]

Yes. :)

 

I did a safari a few years back with an old Pentax and what I thought was a good zoom (around 120-140mm if I remember correctly). Fortunately for me, there was someone with a high-end 'loaner' (Canon system with a 2x TC and something around 300mm) that they suggested I use as well since I was "obviously much more into the photography" than they were.

 

The short answer is that 160mm will work for certain *types* of wildlife, but not for others. Certain animals: cheetahs, antelope, and birds were, in my experience, quite twitchy (in the case of the animals without claws this is understandable) and difficult to approach without raising the tension level (a good time to back off). As someone has already pointed out, leopards tend to stay in the trees during the day. For these animals I just don't see how 160mm is going to cut it.

 

I would look for a flexible system myself -- what about a 70-200/f4 and a 2x TC (if you camera supports it) or a 1.4x TC? With DSLR cropping that would reach out as far as 640mm at f5.6 right? (200 x 2 x 1.6) This would really give you a good system for less than $1000.

 

The tricky part is how to deal with the light conditions since you'll be most likely to be out shortly after sunrise and shortly before/during sunset -- I know that I had a 2x TC and a mid-range L on the loaner I was using and that I never had real problems with shooting. I *did* have to use ISO800 film on a few overcast days but for the most part found myself able to shoot with ISO400 (and even 160) without any problem.

 

If you feel that ISO400/800 just won't cut it then, of course, you'll need a bigger lens, in which case I'd have a look at renting or borrowing (with insurance) for the duration of the safari.

 

I'd also encourage you to take a film SLR body that is compatible with your lenses (e.g. Elan, Rebel). There are two reasons for this: 1) if something goes wrong with your DSLR you'll have backup to hand and you can get film of some quality anywhere in the world, 2) I found it very handy to have a wide-angle lens ready on a second body.

 

Switching lenses in the back of a moving Range Rover can be tricky (and is likely to get dust into the system anyway) and it enables you to just grab the camera and shoot a fantastic landscape without having to lose any time. I have a photograph on my wall from Kenya -- it's my favourite from the entire trip even though it's probably not the best... I caught it just around sunset when I happened to turn away from the lions and look behind me at the landscape. If I'd had to switch lenses I'd probably have missed it.

 

The other issue that you'll need to address is storage for digital photos -- I know that one of the sections here contains insight for taking portable hard drives on safari for backup purposes, so it's worth a good read. Africa is so extreme (both beautiful good and, weirdly, beautiful bad) that you'll probably want to shoot a full resolution most of the time just in case...

 

HTH.

[bill_thorlin]

You will regret not taking the biggest lens you can lay your hands on - beg,borrow or steal the best you can get ! You will often get quite close to the animals in a vehicle but within a short space of time you will be out of range of a wonderful shot (particularly with the special animals like leopards,bat eared fox etc.etc.etc.)and the frustration will build.

 

Also do your level best to cover the low light situations - sunrise & sunset see considerable activity on the animal front as well as some spectacular landscapes.

 

Dust can be a real bugbear especially if there has been a rains failure or you are there at the end of the dry season.Take some thick weave cloth large enough to cover all your kit laying out on the car seat particularly if you have a back-up kit with you which I would say was almost essential.Do a kit clean,preferably every lunchtime as there is no great point in being out then , so have a few beers and a siesta (or do it in the evening if you have to).This includes shaking the cover.

 

Please also be aware that your kit could be very attractive to others so keep it safe and in sight at all times when out and about.

 

I lived in Kenya for nearly 10 years and went back many times thereafter and spent many happy and thrilling days out in the bush - enough to write a book !

 

If you feel like raising any other matters please do not hesitate.

[bill sullivan]

I have never been on an African safari, but I have been on a boat through Southeast Alaska, and I am going to say you will want all the telephoto reach you can get. However, although I have been a lifelong film user, I recently sunk a little money into a Canon A-95 digital camera and have been impressed with the reach it provides, especially with a little PhotoShopping. And Canon doesn't even seem to advertise the A-95 as a wildlife camera. There are other digitals in the $400-$700 range that are touted as having wildlife potential. You don't say how you want to use the photos, and if you've never tried digital before, you better get some good advice on batteries and memory versus file size. No promises, but maybe this is a possibility for you. Have a good trip.

[marcus_erne]

I have spent an entire year in SA due to a work assignment.

While I was there, photo safaris were the main thing on weekends for me to do... :-)

 

While you can get away with short focal lengths for large animals such as elephant, you will have a hard time with wild boar (warthog) or even birds!

The best lens that I can recommend for little money in any camera mount is the Tokina ATX 80-400mm I (or II which comes with tripod mount). It is small, cheap and offers good performance and a very useful range Although in direct comparison not on prime level (e.g. 300mm f/4), it ought to be sufficient for hobby or amateur level!

 

You can find my review of the Tokina here:

http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/reviews/tokina80400.htm

 

Nowadays I would not botheranymore to get a tripod collar for this lens!

 

Because of the good practical experience I made with the Tokina and its focal range, I have "upgraded" to a Canon DSLR with the 100-400mm IS lately...

[marcus_erne]

Oh, I forgot to say that a zoom is far better for quick compositinal work then primes. I have worked with both on 3 bodies at the same time, but the zoom is far more convenient and flexible to use.

The true advantage of primes in terms of resolution over a zoom can only be detected in DIRECT comparison.

So for non-professional work use I personally rate a zoom #1 over a prime! Just my 2 cents...

[vandit]

Where in Africa are you going?

 

Generally speaking, in the more popular parks, you'll certainly have situations where the wildlife is close enough for you to get environmental shots with your given focal length.

 

I've managed to get shots of sparring elephants, taken on foot, with a 28-105 lens (on a film body)... it's in my portfolio, under African Wildlife. However, I wouldnt rely on that for consistent results.

 

In general, you will miss a lot more photo ops than you'll get... especially with medium-sized animals and especially with herbivores.

 

I would really suggest 300mm as a minimum effective focal length for *consistently* getting environmental shots.

 

Regards,

Vandit

 

PS: I too shoot with a 100-400 and a 300/4. Good choice (well, except for the selling them bit :))