# Recommendation For Long Lenses



## cfargo (Jan 6, 2012)

I’m heading on a South African Photo Safari on the first of March and need some lens advice. I’m shooting with the 1D Mk IV and the 5D Mk II. I own the 500 f/4L IS, 100-400 f/4-5.6L, 70-300 f/4-5.6L, 70-200 f/2.8L along with a 1.4x III and a 2.0x III tele-converters. I have ruled out taking the 100-400 as it is too soft. I’m leaning on taking the 70-200 over the 70-300 due to it’s f/2.8 aperture. It’s a non brainer that I’m taking the 500mm f/4 so my void is between 200 and 500.

I was looking hard at filling this void with the 400mm f/4L DO since it is light weight and would be hand held quite a bit. My concern here is that the 400 DO is 11 year old technology and due to be replaced any day. My other 2 options are the 300mm f/2.8L II with or without 1.4x converter or the 400mm f/2.8L II. Of course the 400mm f/2.8L II is going to be much harder to hand hold and the 300mm f/2.8L II is shorter.

I would love to hear others opinions on which way to go with these 3 options. The other stuff I shoot is nature and aviation.

Curt Fargo


----------



## Mendolera (Jan 6, 2012)

If you can hold off a couple weeks we might get lucky (though doubtful) and see the 200-400 f/4 which I think would a good lens for a Safari. My friend brought his 200-400 Nikon and said it was great for this trip to SA.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 6, 2012)

I'd take the 300/2.8 II + 1.4x III over the 400/4 DO - the IQ of the new 300/2.8 even with a TC beats the 400/4 DO lens. 

The 200-400mm with the built-in TC would be ideal...but given that we haven't even seen a formal announcement yet and Canon has still not delivered on the 500/4 II and 600/4 II that were announced back in 2010, I sure wouldn't be holding out any hope you'd actually see that lens by March...perhaps not even March of 2013...


----------



## jasonsim (Jan 6, 2012)

I would take the 100-400mm with the 500mm. I've never been on a real safari, but I imagine that there are times that the trucks can get closer to the animals. The zoom is just too versatile to leave behind. I personally, would not want to switch lenses too much in those dusty conditions. I'd save the 500 with the 1.4x for birds. I would leave the 5D II at home unless you will be taking some landscape wide angle shots. Say with a 17-40mm or 16-35mm.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Jan 6, 2012)

Take the 500, the 79-200 and the teleconverters. If you have to take another lens, take a 24-105 as not all 
the "good" shots on safari are animals in the distance. You might also consider someone to carry all that stuff.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 6, 2012)

jasonsim said:


> I would leave the 5D II at home unless you will be taking some landscape wide angle shots. Say with a 17-40mm or 16-35mm.



I'd bring it, as a backup if nothing else.



jasonsim said:


> ...I imagine that there are times that the trucks can get closer to the animals.



Definitely true. The first image gives an idea of just how close they get - literally within touching distance, at least that was my experience in Ngorongoro Crater. Sometimes you get even closer...the second shot is my wife and I among a troop of mountain gorillas at Parc National des Volcans in Rwanda. 

Our trip to Africa was 6 years ago...I wish I'd had the gear I have today back then, instead of a 4 MP superzoom P&S...

Bottom line - you'll definitely want a general purpose or ultrawide zoom, IMO.


----------



## Jim K (Jan 6, 2012)

jasonsim said:


> I would leave the 5D II at home unless you will be taking some landscape wide angle shots.


If the 5DII and 7D are your only bodies I would bring them both. No way would I spend that much money and time and only bring one body. 

A friend (Nikon shooter) took an Africa trip last fall. Bought a 200-400 for the trip but had wanted one for a while, not sure if he took his 500. I'll see if I can find his trip report, probably on Nikon Cafe.


----------



## thejoyofsobe (Jan 6, 2012)

dickgrafixstop said:


> Take the 500, the 79-200 and the teleconverters. If you have to take another lens, take a 24-105 as not all
> the "good" shots on safari are animals in the distance. You might also consider someone to carry all that stuff.


this would seem to get you the best variety of options. The 70-200mm lets you shooter faster and in lower light. the 500mm gets you that reach to help fill you frame and since you have the 1D would you could still use autofocus with a 2x teleconverter while achieving a 1300mm focal length 35mm equivalent.


----------



## cfargo (Jan 6, 2012)

Jim, My main camera will be a 1D Mk IV and the 5D Mk II will be my backup and for landscapes. I do own a 7D but wasn’t planning on bringing it due to limited space/weight.

Yes I would give my left _ _ _ for the 200-400 but Canon is more interested in coming out with new Point & Shoots for now than they are producing this lens. I have even toyed with going over to the dark side just to get their 14-24 f2.8 G ED and their 200-400mm f/4 G. Now that they have the D4 (and will be shipping next month), Canon is going to lose that many more users even faster. Canon needs to wake up if you ask me.
Below is my list of lenses I plan on bringing and already own. My earlier list was just to show the area that I’m wanting to fill and trying to decide on what to buy. I would have to say that for this minute, I’m leaning towards the 300mm f/2.8 L II. 

I still would love to hear more thoughts on this.

500mm f/4L
70-200mm f/2.8L II
24-105mm f/4.0 L
17-40mm f/4.0 L
24mm f/1.4 L (for stars)
14mm f/2.8 L (if I have room)
8-15mm f/4.0 L


----------



## dr croubie (Jan 6, 2012)

Just how close do you want to get? (I love that photo, from what I remember it was taken upside-down hanging from a tripod held by the feet, cable release, and 30mm or so lens).
So I'd definitely be bringing the 5D2 with a wide-angle zoom like the 24-105.

I'll stick in a vote for the 70-300L over the 100-400, if not just for the more compact size and sealing.
Compared to the 70-200 f/2.8L (I presume non-IS), that's a tougher call.

- If you've already got the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters, I'd be taking that combo, you get 70-200 @ f/2.8, 200-280 @ f/4, 280-400 f/5.6. The 70-300L IQ @ 300mm is probably a bit better than the 70-200 telecombo, and you get IS, but you're stuck limited at 300mm max.

- Or the 70-200 with no tc, 300/2.8, and 300/2.8 with 1.4 tc gives 420/4.0, then 500/4.0, 300/2.8 x2 is 600/5.6, 500/4 x 1.4 is 700/5.6, 500/4 x2 is 1000/8.

- Or the above with 70-300L, leave the 1.4x on the 300/2.8 permanently, when the light gets dimmer switch to the 300/2.8 with no tc.

The 400/2.8 is very nice, the II version is just on the verge of hand-holdability (depending on how big/fit you are), but it's still a lot bigger compared to the 300/2.8. So i'd be choosing from those three options, the first one uses the lenses you've got, the other two require buying a 300/2.8 (but hey, it's a good excuse to spend money).


----------



## Stu_bert (Jan 6, 2012)

I've done mainly self-drive safaris in Kruger & Etosha/Caprivi strip, but also (organised) trips to Botswana, Kenya & Tanzania...

I normally take 2 bodies (recently both 1Ds Mk III), leave the 500mm on one, the 70-200mm or 70-300mm on the other and only occasionally stop to put on either the 17-40mm or a 1.4x converter on the 500mm. For the "up-close", the 70-200mm "wins", but I would say a high percentage are shot with the 500mm lens and I just move the vehicle to where I want to be...

Most recent trip I played with a 7D just for video, which was cool with the 500mm lens 

Are you doing an organised trip? If you are, then make sure you understand the vehicle(s) so you can make appropriate decisions on support for any of your lenses.

I can't think of many times I've yearned for a 400mm or 300mm over using the 500mm. In fact many times, it's the opposite, I'm worrying about DOF @ the subject distance to ensure I can get 2 or more in focus without losing too much speed.

Even on organised trips, especially those specialised photographic trips, then the driver will normally position you based on the glass of the shooters, and most seem to stick with the 500mm or 600mm. 

200-400mm would definitely be interesting in the future, however, if money is no issue, then take a 300mm f/2.8 - but probably more as a backup 

Few other tips - I bought a little sandisk memory holder for the most recent trip. Has a ring so you can attach it to the camera strap, which was easier. A pair of hyperdrive ipads were there for backups, and the ipad for preview (alas did not have a wifi x2 at the time). Oh and bought a coffee mug which plugged into the car cig lighter and boiled me coffee for breakfast in the morning...

Happy to provide any other info which may help, especially if you are doing self-drive....


----------



## xROELOFx (Jan 6, 2012)

why don't bring the 500 f/4? if you can't take it with you, the 400 f/2.8 is definitely not an option too. it's larger and heavier then the 500.
i'd go with the 70-200 and a 300 f/2.8 + 1.4 TC. if the 300 f/2.8 is too large/heavy and you can deal with 1 stop less light, you can also consider the 300 f/4.

good luck with your choice and your trip! wish i could join .
bring home some nice pictures, and don't forget to share them with us


----------



## NWPhil (Jan 6, 2012)

Hi Curt,
my two cents, as I have been on a safari in Tanzania two years ago:
YES, the 500 mm and both converters. Is not just the birds that are far away or small
Then the 70-200 2.8L - fast enough and in range for when they get closer.
It's a big world out there - I don't think you need the 8-14mm, 17 to 24 is a good range as everything will look too small, but bring also a 100 or 180mm macro. Between bugs, flowers and other textures, you will have you tons of fun.
But you still need a good wide angle lens. My choice would be either the 14mm 2.8L or the 24mm 1.4 L II versions.
Keep in mind that the 100mm can be used for portraits too
In sum:
you want the max range, then something around 100/300 and something wider at/than 24.
Bring both bodies -while in safari, if you were smart enough and able to afford it, it will be only you and close friend/family - no strangers. It will help having the big lens always on, and the second one with a shorther lens for snap-shots or closer range. It's not easy to change lens while the 4x4 is moving, aside of potential dust. Bring a sturdy tripod, and for the 4x4 you can buy a bag of beans locally - you will need the support as you will shooting from the open top canopy most of the times.
You will need battery chargers: a solar type and/or cigarette lighter type aside of the outlet (do check what voltage and socket type is used locally
a backup system for all your photos would be a great addition too - meaning a laptop with an external backup drive.
Check/search on tripadvisor forums for other gear and advice needed while out there
Good luck


----------



## cfargo (Jan 7, 2012)

I'm thinking the 8-15mm for hanging over the side of the landrover on a monopod with a long cable release to shoot animal that come up right next to us. I'm also hoping that at Jacks Camp, I will be close enough to the Mearkats to get some interesting pictures with this lens. I have enjoyed the 8-15mm 10 times more than I thought I would. It is an awesome lens.

I have never been to Africa before but here is where I'm going.
 Makgadikgadi Pan Game Reserve Jack's Camp
Northern Botswana, Africa


----------



## tvboy (Jan 7, 2012)

I also was recently in Botswana in late Oct early Nov...best time between dry and rainy season there and would say as other longer the better. The stars were find with a 17 - 40. and would recommend that you find out what kind of vehicle you are going to be in so you can figure out how to shoot with that long lens. Some trucks don't have enough room for a tripod. I say forget the Ipad or any computer too much weight and trouble...buy a Nexto extreme(or something similar...B&H) maybe 750gig and transfer your cards to that. I never had any trouble with that and faster than a computer. Do all your processing at home. See if your guides have inverters for their truck so you can use your AC outlet(many people come from Europe besides North America)and charge everything through your ac adapter.


----------



## Stu_bert (Jan 8, 2012)

tvboy said:


> I also was recently in Botswana in late Oct early Nov...best time between dry and rainy season there and would say as other longer the better. The stars were find with a 17 - 40. and would recommend that you find out what kind of vehicle you are going to be in so you can figure out how to shoot with that long lens. Some trucks don't have enough room for a tripod. I say forget the Ipad or any computer too much weight and trouble...buy a Nexto extreme(or something similar...B&H) maybe 750gig and transfer your cards to that. I never had any trouble with that and faster than a computer. Do all your processing at home. See if your guides have inverters for their truck so you can use your AC outlet(many people come from Europe besides North America)and charge everything through your ac adapter.



The hyperdrive ipad is a storage device, but it also can transfer images at the end of the day or during, to an ipad for review. I always go for storage devices where I can buy the HDD separate and avoid unnecessary cost. I also personally prefer a bigger screen, so I just use the ipad for critique / review but appreciate everyone is different. All the permanent camps I have been to have power, would not worry about charging in the field, but would take a spare battery. 1Ds works all day without issue even on safari (so 10 hrs use). 

Website links OP provided also seem to have modified land-rover vehicles so one assumes that as it is a (rather expensive) photographic trip that they have support sorted out, but I would check to understand the type in use. I've seen pro clamps being used with wimberley heads (or similar gimbals), but a lot of the time I still prefer a beanbag. In other vehicles I have had to resort to monopod and wimberley which is still better for me than hand-holding, but again everyone has their preference.

Given also it is a photo trip - what do the organizers suggest in terms of equipment? Having done the trip before, I would expect some good advice as to lenses in the vehicle & opportunities back at camp.

Finally, if you know what sort of support will be in place in the vehicles, and you have not tried that combination before it is worthwhile if you can trialling it before the trip. I'm sure they will advise you there, but extra prep on "trips of a lifetime" are always rewarding


----------



## Jim K (Jan 12, 2012)

Curt,

My friend, Harryb, just posted his thoughts on the Nikon equipment he took to Africa this year and what he would take next time. It's on Dgrin in the Wildlife forum as "Africa - Closing Thoughts" http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=213179

Post 3 by Andy is about his Canon gear and what he would take next time.

Jim


----------



## wickidwombat (Jan 12, 2012)

Stu_bert said:


> tvboy said:
> 
> 
> > I also was recently in Botswana in late Oct early Nov...best time between dry and rainy season there and would say as other longer the better. The stars were find with a 17 - 40. and would recommend that you find out what kind of vehicle you are going to be in so you can figure out how to shoot with that long lens. Some trucks don't have enough room for a tripod. I say forget the Ipad or any computer too much weight and trouble...buy a Nexto extreme(or something similar...B&H) maybe 750gig and transfer your cards to that. I never had any trouble with that and faster than a computer. Do all your processing at home. See if your guides have inverters for their truck so you can use your AC outlet(many people come from Europe besides North America)and charge everything through your ac adapter.
> ...



that hyper drive looks awesome i've been looking for something like that for ages thanks for the tip


----------



## revup67 (Jan 12, 2012)

I'd skip the teleconverters, grab the 7D and you instantly have a 1.6 multiplier without any reduction in lightas the TC's are known for plus other features such as Af that can be affected. Also, your 500mm just became an 800mm. You'd also have the faster FPS for BIFS vs. the sluggish FPS on the 5D. if time permits, I might research the The Blue Crane videos which talk about the best ways to tweak that 7D and keep the noise to a bare minimum. At ISO 100 and RAW the images are stellar. I'd also concentrate on eliminating anything without IS on the long end.


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 12, 2012)

revup67 said:


> I'd skip the teleconverters, grab the 7D and you instantly have a 1.6 multiplier without any reduction in lightas the TC's are known for plus other features such as Af that can be affected. Also, your 500mm just became an 800mm. You'd also have the faster FPS for BIFS vs. the sluggish FPS on the 5D. if time permits, I might research the The Blue Crane videos which talk about the best ways to tweak that 7D and keep the noise to a bare minimum. At ISO 100 and RAW the images are stellar. I'd also concentrate on eliminating anything without IS on the long end.



OP has stated his main camera will be the 1D IV - however good the 7D is then the 1D4 will always be a couple of steps better.


----------



## revup67 (Jan 13, 2012)

_OP has stated his main camera will be the 1D IV - however good the 7D is then the 1D4 will always be a couple of steps better. _

Correct however I had made reference to the 5D as the 1DIV is better than the 5D as well as the 7D


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 13, 2012)

I was making the point that there was no point in taking the 7D as at every point the 1D IV was better. The OP was going to use the 5D II for landscapes - where again it would outstrip the 7D and the 1D IV - so his 1D IV and 5D II was the best combination. I am sure the OP had thought this through carefully.

BTW - The 1D IV with lens + 1.4 gives more reach than the 7D + lens - and the 1D IV has AF at f8 if needed


----------



## smirkypants (Jan 13, 2012)

I'm kind of with REVUP on this. The 1D4 can handle anything the 5D can, but on the jeep I'd have the 7D+500=800 equivalent and still be at f4. On the 1d4 I'd have mounted the 70-200+1.4 and be at about 364mm max zoom @ f4. Maybe keep the 5D + wide angle zoom or a couple of small primes. Bodies are generally smaller than lenses and TCs and the 7D & 5D share batteries. Three bodies and three lenses and you've got super long, long, medium and short covered. Plus, you're backed up twice.

Don't poo-poo the 7D+500. I rented a 500 for a month shooting a major tournament and made a lot of money from what it produced. I also got a write-up in an important equine trade magazine on the strength of a lot of the photos I took. To my eye, IQ is a wash between 7D vs. 1D4 +TC to get roughly the same reach, plus you don't lose a stop with the 7D.


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 13, 2012)

So you are saying take the 7D as well then? That makes more sense than dumping the converters as REVUP was suggesting ;D

I would expect on safari in Africa in their summer that losing a stop would not be much of an issue shooting at that reach.

I have compared the IQ of the 1D4 and the 7D (on the 400 f/2.8) - which is why both 7Ds have been sold on.

Dont underestimate the 5DII on slower moving large animals either especially with the 500 at F/4 - the background blur will be far far better than the 7D will achieve


----------



## smirkypants (Jan 13, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> So you are saying take the 7D as well then? That makes more sense than dumping the converters as REVUP was suggesting ;D I would expect on safari in Africa in their summer that losing a stop would not be much of an issue shooting at that reach.
> 
> I have compared the IQ of the 1D4 and the 7D (on the 400 f/2.8) - which is why both 7Ds have been sold on.
> 
> Dont underestimate the 5DII on slower moving large animals either especially with the 500 at F/4 - the background blur will be far far better than the 7D will achieve


But it's an unfair comparison, Squibby! Of course the 1D4 will look better than the 7D at f2.8. The point is that you need a TC or a longer lens on the 1D4 to get where the 7D takes you, and the TC hits your image quality and it hits your aperture. The longer lens is bigger and more expensive. 

And at the golden hour, when you're taking your prettiest shots, you're going to be wanting f4. Sure the midday sun will make aperture irrelevant. Indeed, I would suggest taking a few ND filters in order to maintain a low aperture. At mid-day in Africa at f4 you're probably shooting about, what, 1/2000th to 1/8000th at 100-200 ISO? Being able to cut 3 stops to make sure you don't exceed your shutter speed might be nice.

As for the 5D2/500 at f4... That's just an enormous chunk of hardware for something that a 7D + 70-300 (480 equivalent) can get you and you can hang around your neck to boot. You'll get very good photos, plus you can be extremely mobile with the latter and you will nail shots you will otherwise have missed. Try hopping out of a jeep and running to an angle with a 500 and you're lion fodder.


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 13, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > So you are saying take the 7D as well then? That makes more sense than dumping the converters as REVUP was suggesting ;D I would expect on safari in Africa in their summer that losing a stop would not be much of an issue shooting at that reach.
> ...



Are we comparing quality or mobility?

I have said that taking all 3 bodies is a good idea - I would definitely take all converters too - especially the x2 for maximum reach.

However there will times when a 500 is all you need - and for IQ a 5D + 500 will look a lot better than a 7D with the 70-300L. However the 5DII will be wanted for lightweight lens too so then you get mobility and IQ.

Of course the 70-300L is only f/5.6 which is the same as the 500 +1.4 - which you seemed to indicate was an issue whereas the 5DII would be able still to shoot at F/4. On the 1D4 and the 5DII of course you have the higher iso to play with anyway so f/4 to f/5.6 would not be an issue providing DOF was OK. F/5.6 still gives significant background blur which is when the background start to get messy on the 7D

Shooting at iso 50 is a good option in the bright light. I would think that iso50, f/5.6 would not push the shutter to be faster than 1/8000.

So I think we are in agreement - use the 1D4 and 5DII when IQ is the priority, 7D when mobility with reach is the priority.


----------



## jhpeterson (Jan 13, 2012)

cfargo said:


> I still would love to hear more thoughts on this.
> 
> 500mm f/4L
> 70-200mm f/2.8L II
> ...


My thought would be to go with the 300. Even though the 400 is a most amazing piece of glass, there's likely just not enough difference between it and the 500 to justify taking it along. Besides, the 300 focuses closer, thus it's more useful for relatively short range. You also should be able hand-hold it for longer and in a lot more situations, as I've found it is still small and light enough to capture so many of those spontaneous moments. (Yes, I'd take along the 300 for "grab" shots!)
While I have yet to be on safari in Africa, I have friends who've led groups in the bush. If you want specific recommendations for the places mentioned, perhaps I could ask them.


----------



## 92101media (Jan 13, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I would expect on safari in Africa in their summer that losing a stop would not be much of an issue shooting at that reach.



In general, the best chance to take photos of wildlife in Africa is around a watering hole, in either early morning (one will often have to get up and/or leave before dawn for these opportunities) or early evening, before the sun gets too hot & all the animals go & hide in the shade. Luckily, early morning or early evening is a good time of day to take photos as far as quality of light goes, however the amount of available light is not as great as during the middle of the day, so, depending on the situation, max aperture may well come into play.


----------



## cfargo (Jan 14, 2012)

Thanks for all the great advice. I went to PMA/CES and played with the lenses. The 300mm f/2.8L II gives me so many more options than the 400 f/4.0L DO and the 300 is current technology where the 400 is 12 years old. While still on the show floor I got on my phone and ordered the 300mm f/2.8L II. I have also come to the conclusion that I'm going to bring my 7D Also.

My Body & Lens List:

1D MK IV, 5D MK II, 7D, G10 (IR Converted)

500mm f/4L
300mm f/2.8L
70-200mm f/2.8L II
24-105mm f/4.0 L
17-40mm f/4.0 L
24mm f/1.4 L 
14mm f/2.8 L (if I have room)
8-15mm f/4.0 L
1.4X III
2.0X III


----------



## wickidwombat (Jan 14, 2012)

cfargo said:


> Thanks for all the great advice. I went to PMA/CES and played with the lenses. The 300mm f/2.8L II gives me so many more options than the 400 f/4.0L DO and the 300 is current technology where the 400 is 12 years old. While still on the show floor I got on my phone and ordered the 300mm f/2.8L II. I have also come to the conclusion that I'm going to bring my 7D Also.
> 
> My Body & Lens List:
> 
> ...



dont forget to add a sherper to the list to carry all that


----------



## smirkypants (Jan 14, 2012)

That, my friend, is a ton of gear. As I said, the bodies act as teleconverters to cover focal ranges. The 7D is a 1.6 and the 1D4 is a 1.3. If you think of it that way, there's a lot of overlap everwhere. 

• The 17-40/4 + 70-200/2.8 with the various bodies makes the 24-105 irrelevant. 
• The 70-200/2.8 + 500/4 with various bodies completely overlaps the 300/2.8 (but the 300 is sweet). 
• The 8-15/4 with various bodies completely overlaps the bulky 14/2.8 (though not the same kind of lens)

Three lenses, two teleconverters, about 15 pounds, your back and sherpa saved with no loss in focal length coverage. Keep the long mainly on the 7D, the medium mainly on the 1D4 and the short mainly on the 5D2. Play to their strengths but swap out when needed.


----------



## cfargo (Jan 14, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> dont forget to add a sherper to the list to carry all that



No hiking on this trip and in the bush they don't let you out of the land rovers too much.


----------



## TMan (Jan 14, 2012)

cfargo said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > dont forget to add a sherper to the list to carry all that
> ...



I had few instances in Kruger National Park where my 70-200 f/4 lens felt short -- lion kill and and a resting leopard. A 5D Mark II with a 24-105 lens or 24mm L lens will be very handy as animals do get very close in most cases.
You can also visit this website and pose your question there: http://www.outdoorphoto.co.za/forums/. This forum has lots of experienced wildlife photographers that regularly go to the national parks in South Africa and therefore can also assist you.


----------



## Zo0m (Jan 14, 2012)

I did a safari in serenghetti last year and would say that there is an overly big fetish on millimeters amongst people... Dont get me wrong, sometimes youll need those 500mm or even more. I just want to state that some of my best shots i got with a standard lens allowing me to encompass the animals as well as their native enviroment in the same shot.


----------



## willrobb (Jan 16, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> I'd take the 300/2.8 II + 1.4x III over the 400/4 DO - the IQ of the new 300/2.8 even with a TC beats the 400/4 DO lens.



I haven't used either of these lenses, but I know a few people who use them and everyone loves the 300 2.8II and those with the 400DO aren't so enamoured with it (but that's only 2 people I've met with the 400, so not a good sample of people).


----------



## aldvan (Jan 16, 2012)

cfargo said:


> I have ruled out taking the 100-400 as it is too soft.



May be I'm quite biased about the 100-400, since it is a lens I adore. I'm afraid you get a bad example of it and that is a shame, since, I know that for personal experience in photosafari in SA, the 100-400 has the perfect zoom range for the business. By the way, what do you mean by 'soft'? Is the following image (100-400 at 300) soft for you? (Unfortunately I had to resize it to allow uploading it, loosing a lot of IQ)

P.S. I think the following article could be very useful.
http://www.canonrumors.com/tech-articles/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-myths/


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 16, 2012)

Why not just take a 50mm f1.8 and zoom with your feet? ;D when people tell me that I offer to let them shoot from my 25th floor balcony.

Seriously though, I like the 500mm plus 70-200 plan plus a good medium to wide zoom. Take the teleconverters, and the 5d as a backup to the Mk4. Anything more as space/weight allowance and your ability to carry it allow. I can't see picking up the 400 DO or the 300 II as there are so big and expensive. Unless you have a paid assistant, or are seeking to end a marriage.

I never travel without my 8-15, but maybe that's just me.

Oh and interestingly, if your main (normal) camera is a EOS 1 MK4, then the 7D is a 1.2 crop, and the 5D is a .77 crop.


----------



## cfargo (Jan 16, 2012)

aldvan said:


> cfargo said:
> 
> 
> > I have ruled out taking the 100-400 as it is too soft.
> ...



I'm very well aware that the 100-400's are not all created equal. There are good ones out there and there are bad ones. I agree the focal length is awesome for a safari. But what made me stop using MY 100-400 altogether is when I tried to micro adjust it, the output was too soft that I wasn't even able to find the sharpest point. I do own the 70-300L also but I opted for the 70-200 f/2.8L II along with the 300mm f/2.8L II instead because I can put converters on both of these lenses, their faster and sharper.

As for TexPhoto's idea of zooming with feet, I'm just crazy enough to do that but I want to be able to shoot again the next day not being the days kill. I love a wide angle, I like getting right into my subjects face but they won't let me in Africa for some reason.


----------



## gak (Jan 16, 2012)

Let me offer a different perspective, one gained on dozens of photo safaris. I lived in South Africa for several years and have gone back twice in the past few years.

Unless you are going on a safari organized by and for professional or seriously advanced photographers you will be too weighted down by all that gear to react quickly.

My suggestion is that you buy a high quality compact like a canon G1X or Fuji X10, and carry the 5D II with the 70-300L as your two main pieces of equipment. Unless you are making room-size prints this combination would give to the ability to react quickly to fleeting opportunities and still get very good quality images. IS and the ability to hand hold the 70-300 will serve you better in the bush than a longer reach setup that requires a tripod.


----------



## cfargo (Jan 16, 2012)

gak said:


> Let me offer a different perspective, one gained on dozens of photo safaris. I lived in South Africa for several years and have gone back twice in the past few years.
> 
> Unless you are going on a safari organized by and for professional or seriously advanced photographers you will be too weighted down by all that gear to react quickly.
> 
> My suggestion is that you buy a high quality compact like a canon G1X or Fuji X10, and carry the 5D II with the 70-300L as your two main pieces of equipment. Unless you are making room-size prints this combination would give to the ability to react quickly to fleeting opportunities and still get very good quality images. IS and the ability to hand hold the 70-300 will serve you better in the bush than a longer reach setup that requires a tripod.



Thanks, this is Organized by a Pro Photographer for Photographers. At this point I'm planning on hand holding everything except the 500 while in the vehicle.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jan 17, 2012)

wow that price is insane... seriously insane... I just go hire a 4x4 and can hire a driver for a small fee then its just me and my wife so there is no schedule and we can do what we want when we want. and it probably costs half that amount for 2 of us... just saying... can pick up a 1Dx with the savings


----------



## aldvan (Jan 17, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> wow that price is insane... seriously insane... I just go hire a 4x4 and can hire a driver for a small fee then its just me and my wife so there is no schedule and we can do what we want when we want. and it probably costs half that amount for 2 of us... just saying... can pick up a 1Dx with the savings



Too much money is at the present in too few people...


----------



## wickidwombat (Jan 17, 2012)

cfargo said:


> aldvan said:
> 
> 
> > cfargo said:
> ...


Actually they do, in many of the south african private game parks you can go on guarded hikes with several armed guards and spotters who are in radio contact so they can take you directly to the animals, i have never done one but would love to, they are definately not cheap and there is still more risk than shooting from within a vehicle however it allows you to get angles you simly cannot achieve from a vehicle. i'm going to look into it for a trip next year.


----------



## Caps18 (Jan 18, 2012)

You will be better off with no lens in the 200-500 range, but with different cameras that can make up the difference.

If you have a second person, have them take the 7D with 70-200+/- TC, Mk4 with 500+/-TC, and the 5Dm2 with 8-15 and a fast portrait prime. If you only want two camera, the 70-200 would work on the 5Dm2 as well.


----------



## bycostello (Jan 18, 2012)

have you considered hiring a lens? might make more sense as safari as bit of a specialty situation and if just a one off...


----------



## cfargo (Jan 18, 2012)

bycostello said:


> have you considered hiring a lens? might make more sense as safari as bit of a specialty situation and if just a one off...



Not really as it would cost $1200 to rent one for 4 weeks and it cost $7199 to buy a new one. If I really didn't want to keep it I'm sure I could sell it for $6000 afterwards very quickly.


----------

