For those who have been to Africa - camera/lens combo options

[Ben C]

Finally taking my first trip to Africa in August on a family trip. We’ll be spending a few days each in Madikwe game reserve in S. Africa, another private reserve near Greater Kruger, and Victoria Falls. I‘m trying to figure out what lenses to acquire/bring for the trip, particularly since Nikon has some sales going on Z lenses right now. My biggest question revolves around how much reach one generally needs in Africa, and weight concerns. I’m used to shooting songbirds here on the Texas coast for which no lens is long enough. I’ve had an 800pf on order since day 1 but at this rate I doubt I’ll have it in time, and frankly I’m not sure I need it anymore.

I have both a Z9 and an OM Systems OM-1. I generally bring the OM-1 when traveling due to the smaller size and lighter weight of the body and especially the lenses, but I plan to bring both cameras with me to Africa.

My only long lens for the Z9 is my adapted Tamron 150-600 G2. Aside from the 800 PF I have also been anxiously awaiting the Z 200-600 to replace my adapted 150-600, but at this rate I don’t expect to be able to get my hands on one before August - if it’s even announced by then. I often shoot my 150-600 in DX mode (900mm equiv) for songbirds for the extra reach and smaller file size. Hence the 800 PF preorder. I have a 100-400 for the OM-1, which of course equates to a 200-800. I‘ve no doubt the 800 PF is a superior choice for 800 mm since with the OM-1 at only 20 MP and 200 base ISO it‘s a bit noisier and the cropping possibilities are much more limited. But the Olympus 100-400 is sharper and focuses faster than my adapted 150-600 on the Z9.

So, if I were to bring the OM-1 with my 100-400, would I be better off forgetting about the 800 PF, and leaving my 150-600 at home, in favor of a shorter lens for my Z9? I’m thinking either (1) the Z 100-400, or (2) the Z 400 f4. I don’t own either of those lenses but both are slightly discounted right now. I could easily carry the Z9 with one of these lenses and the OM-1 at the same time in the safari vehicle (as opposed to the 800 PF which probably precludes carrying a second camera). With the 100-400 on my Z9 and the Oly 100-400 on my OM-1, I would effectively have 100-800 mm focal lengths covered. With the 400 f4 I’d only have 200-800 covered, but I’d have a nice, fast prime for 400 mm, and I do have the Z 1.4 TC I could use with it. (I could also use the 1.4 TC with my Z 24-70 f4 if need be to cover shorter focal lengths, but I prefer not to have to mess with switching lenses).

We’re taking some small charter flights between reserves so I’m limited to I think 35 pounds of luggage meaning weight is a real factor (though I can have a family member carry some of my weight). I’m also wondering what focal lengths are most important for Africa. My sense is that it’s bigger animals and you get closer to them so maximum reach is not as important, and having shorter focal lengths may be more important, but I really don’t know. I’d appreciate the thoughts of Steve and the Africa veterans on this board as to which combo makes the most sense. Thanks in advance!

 

[Butlerkid]

Welcome to BCG! Glad you joined us!

Have you searched the site for threads about "Africa"? There are several threads addressing this subject.

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

 

[Kemble Widmer]

Started my Africa compulsion with a guided game drive trip to Sabi Sand, and Vic Falls area, and subsequently about 10 self drive trips to Imfolozi and Kruger (Kalahari in a few days). Do about two 3 week trips a year these days. I started with D500 (dx) and same Tamron g2, and almost always felt that was plenty of reach on my self guided safaris (driving my own car on Kruger roads). Typically a guided safari gets you much closer to the animals than self guide since they usually can drive off road, so on guided safari you typically need even less reach. I would think 600mm is fine for guided safaris.

Generally speaking in Africa I typically need a lot less reach than, say, Yellowstone. There Is a much higher % of close encounters than Yellowstone, and as I say if you are going guided the open safari vehicles (OSV) will get you even closer. BUT, if you feel you may be returning and doing self drive, confined to roads, I do feel 800mm awfully nice.

My current safari setup is: One z9, 17-55mm, 70-200mm, and 180-400 with built in 1.4tc (so 180-560), and an additional stand alone 1.4 tc. I would say I use the 17-55mm 1% of the time, but CRITICAL for up close shots of lions, leopards etc. than can cruise right beside the vehicle/OSV, and the occasional landscape shot. Perhaps 5% I’m using my 70-200, and the other 94% I’m on my 180- 560. Perhaps 10% of those shots I throw on the extra 1.4 TC. I could switch my z9 to dx mode for more reach but usually do not, preferring to crop in post processing if needed.

I do plan to start bringing a second body (as soon as z8 comes out, but it has not been a big deal to date only using one body since I am so often on just the 180- 560.

in Yellowstone the game is typically so far off that a 600 or 800pf makes sense, but honestly on Africa safari a zoom is far more useful, as the distance of game at sightings is typically much closer and evenly distributed across focal lengths, if that makes sense.

Hope that helps.

 

[Anjin San]

Steve has a video on his…long story short he says that if you cover the 200-600mm focal length you’re just fine. If/when I ever do a pan Africa trip…and assuming I still have my current lens selection…I will have a 40p/4.5 with TC 1.4 on the Z9 and either the 70-200 or 10l-400 on the other boxy…currently a Z7II but would likely rent another Z9 for the trip unless the Z8 or Z7III turns out to be a true little brother to t(e Z9…and which of those would depend on whether I really thought the f2.8 would be needed…and would have some discussion with the group leader on that…and the 2.0 TC would be in the bag…and assuming my bride was not along as she doesn’t want to go to Africa I would have her Z50 with the 16-50 for anything really close.

 

[Ben C]

Thanks for the helpful responses, and the links to the other threads. Haven't seen any discussion of combining the OM-1 with a Z, but I'm still reading through them and the focal lengths matter more than the camera body anyway. Also watched Steve's video. Seems like the 400 prime would be too limiting and I really should pair a shorter zoom with my effective 200-800 Olympus (for which I also have a 2.0 TC though it makes for a very slow combo). That raises the question of whether the 70-200 f2.8 or the 100-400 f4.5-6.3 would be better. The two are the same size and weight. Seems like the 70-200 pairs better with my other lenses (including my Z 24-70 f4 on the short end for landscapes), but the 100-400 actually seems to be a more highly regarded lens overall, and would certainly be more useful in more situations, especially as a long lens for landscapes in the mountains, for example. Tough decision. I've talked myself into each option several times already!

 

[French Avocado]

I have not been to South Africa and do not know those reserves but I have been to Tanzania twice and wanted more reach - especially for smaller critters. On my trips I took the 200-400 f4, but if I were to go again I would take the 800 PF. Based on current delivery of the 800 PF, I think you will have it in the next month and I would take it. On my second trip I had the 500 PF and it was phenomenal. With the 1.4x it maxed out at 700mm but I wanted more for birds (and to capture an aardwolf). I cannot speak to the OM system but with the Z9, my dream line up would be the Z 800 PF, Z 100-400 and the Z 24-120 f4 (along with the 1.4x).

 

[Ben C]

Thanks French. I had just about given up on the 800. Interesting you think it will be available that soon. As much as I was looking forward to it when announced, I had sort of decided I can't really justify it. While it would be great for shooting warblers and other small songbirds which is much of the shooting I do at home, I'm a little concerned about the size and weight for travel in general, but especially for Africa. People do seem to love it though. Also, I have the 24-70 f4 and not the 24-120. Probably would have gone with the 24-120 but it wasn't available when I got my 24-70, which I purchased when the first Z7 came out several years ago. Thus, the 70-200 gives me more complete focal length coverage. I suppose I could always replace my 24-70 but that's just more money, and for a lens that isn't any sharper and is again a little larger. Again, decisions...

 

[ElenaH]

My current safari setup is: One z9, 17-55mm, 70-200mm, and 180-400 with built in 1.4tc (so 180-560), and an additional stand alone 1.4 tc.

It's a great setup!

I've been many times to Africa and some of them on photographic Safaris with award-winning photographers (like Wim van den Heever, for example) and watched what they are using ;-) Normally they had 400/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 and that's it. Sometimes 14-24/2.8 for nightscapes or Chobe boat cruises where elephants come close.
The problem is that in Madikwe as well as in Kruger (Sabi Sands) they are allowed to drive off road as far as I know and perhaps until the dark. And then you will stand 2m from the leopard and it will be twilight.. So, you need something like 70-200/2.8, you need some fast lens for later hours or for morning hours. It is very important. IMO
You can use 70-200 for scenic or landscapes or animals in the environment and portraits when they are close.

 

[Len Shepherd]

My current safari setup is: One z9, 17-55mm, 70-200mm, and 180-400 with built in 1.4tc (so 180-560), and an additional stand alone 1.4 tc. I would say I use the 17-55mm 1% of the time, but CRITICAL for up close shots of lions, leopards etc. than can cruise right beside the vehicle/OSV, and the occasional landscape shot. Perhaps 5% I’m using my 70-200, and the other 94% I’m on my 180- 560. Perhaps 10% of those shots I throw on the extra 1.4 TC. I could switch my z9 to dx mode for more reach but usually do not, preferring to crop in post processing if needed.

Hope that helps.

Although I have not been to Africa for a few years your summary mirrors my experience of what is generally needed – I consider it is very helpful.

Often but not always it is it possible to increase the weight restriction on an internal flight - Africa being Africa on payment of a not inconsiderable extra charge - though in Africa a deal is often not a deal if a better offer comes along.

When weight is a serious limitation choosing from what is it currently available from Nikon the 100 – 400 plus 1.4 TC is possibly the best option.
If you are can locate a light tight film changing bag it takes only a few seconds to change a TC inside one of these, avoiding dust issues.

Rarely mentioned is two small different coloured towels which can be bought cheaply on arrival or bought in advance by the vehicle driver. One is to wipe suntan lotion from your hands and the other is to cover the gear you are not actually shooting with to help keep dust at bay.

An empty bean bag can be important for sharper shots - with your driver buying beans or whatever locally to fill it.

 

[ElenaH]

Rarely mentioned is two small different coloured towels which can be bought cheaply on arrival or bought in advance by the vehicle driver. One is to wipe suntan lotion from your hands and the other is to cover the gear you are not actually shooting with to help keep dust at bay.

exactly! I saw peple using towel to cover the gear and protect against the dust in Zimbabwe

 

[marklangner]

Lots of great advise here....I shoot Canon so my exact focal lengths may differ somewhat....but regardless if I'm in Africa or Costa Rica, my bag has a 600/F4, 1.4 TC, 100-500, and then based on the trip either a macro lens or a wide angle lens. My long tele and my zoom have served me well in a wide variety of situations and are my work horses. With dual same model bodies, configured the same, I can grab either and basically decide on the spot which focal length for the situation. I'd never carry a straight 800, the 600 plus tele gives me the two reach options and works for me. Unfortunately Canon didn't build the 1.4 TC into their 600 life Nikon did so I have to swap....maybe someday. Nikon has the 600 with the built in TC...so jealous.

 

[fcotterill]

I'm close to 4 decades using Nikon gear 'out there' in central and south Africa,and across a total of about 13 countries (I think).

A telephoto zoom has become my workhorse wildlife lens, in the case of medium sized mammals.Ideally this is a 70-200 f2.8E paired with a 180-400 TC14..... Some earlier thoughts, a summary and factors here

Prior to the 180-400, a 400 f2.8E FL was my core wildlife lens, and often with TC14 or TC2 III, and an excellent optics it is! If space and weight alliances allow a heavy 'Destination' kit, I have "creative optics" as well: 58 f1.4G with 14-30 f4S and 24-120 f4S. In all trips, a trusty 18-35 G and 60mm Micro Nikkor is always in my backpack. And I carry 3 cameras, 2 as minimum, in case one fails or I break it.

However, I often have needed 800mm and sometimes more reach. The 800 PF has firmed up this niche very firmly and it's proved surprising how many images it's added to my portfolio over the past year. I now consider 800 with TC14 essential for smaller mammals, let alone birds.When conditions are kind, this tighter framing has vast creative potential, and these subjects include the largest mammals.

If space and weight are limited, Nikon now has several options for a 'Commando' wildlife kit in African savannahs:

#1 70-200 and 500 PF with a suitable medium zoom such as 24-120, 14-30 f4S;
#2 70-200 or 70-300 with 400 f4.5S
#3 A 100-400 is probably the most versatile single telephoto solution weight for weight and image quality especially. And this option should also manage a 800 PF

In any system you choose, pack a TC14 and if possible a TC2 also.

For dust protection, a light kikoi or chitenge works well. These colourful wraps can be bought in markets, and dry quick after a rinse in the shower. The quick drying hiking towels also work well. I always carry cannisters of compressed air to blow down gear. There's always a 12v compressor in my vehicle (uses lighter plug) and every safari operator should carry one at all times (if they are bushwise that is); this as essential as a Tanganyika hilift jack. The 12v compressor is ideal to blow dust off gear and out of bags etc

 

[Ben C]

Thanks for all the feedback and experiences. The exotic Nikon Z primes with the built-in TC‘s are out of the question - too expensive and too large/heavy for this trip. The 800 PF remains an option of course, but only if it actually becomes available in the next 3.5 months, which I am not counting on. So I’m looking at using my OM-1 with the 100-400 as my long telephoto. That gives me effectively 200-800 f6.3 on the long end (and I have a 2.0 TC for it as well, although I have never tried it and can’t imagine that 1600 f13 is really even usable).

On my Z9, I am thinking of going with the 70-200 f2.8. That should pair nicely with the effective 200-800 on the OM-1 and give me an excellent option for low light situations - at least when the animals are fairly close. I do have the 1.4TC Z to pair with it if needed, making it a 280 f4. I can bring my 24-70 f4 for landscapes too, as that is a pretty lightweight lens.

Does this sound like a good kit, given the options available to me?

Of course, if the 800 PF actually becomes available, or the release that Nikon teased today includes the 200-600 with near-term availability, that could cause me to rethink everything!

 

[Robjwilli]

My standard Sony safari kit is 70-200 f2.8 and 200-600. Both on hi-res bodies for extra flexibility/cropping.
I normally use the 200-600 combo approx 90% of the time but the 70-200 is useful for large animals and with a 2xTC provides insurance in case of problems with the other lens.
Less than 70mm is normally covered by a small APSC camera (Nikon Z50 with 16-50 currently) or even just an iPhone.

 

[fcotterill]

Thanks for all the feedback and experiences. The exotic Nikon Z primes with the built-in TC‘s are out of the question - too expensive and too large/heavy for this trip. The 800 PF remains an option of course, but only if it actually becomes available in the next 3.5 months, which I am not counting on. So I’m looking at using my OM-1 with the 100-400 as my long telephoto. That gives me effectively 200-800 f6.3 on the long end (and I have a 2.0 TC for it as well, although I have never tried it and can’t imagine that 1600 f13 is really even usable).

If atmospheric conditions are kind, 1600 f13 is invaluable, I shared some images last year and I've tested both 800s with their TCs, link to thread shared in previous post.

On my Z9, I am thinking of going with the 70-200 f2.8. That should pair nicely with the effective 200-800 on the OM-1 and give me an excellent option for low light situations - at least when the animals are fairly close.

I've no direct experience with OM but there's abundant evidence in forums your rig will deliver excellent images. I hear Andy Rouse has a helpful website for wildlife photographers.

I do have the 1.4TC Z to pair with it if needed, making it a 280 f4. I can bring my 24-70 f4 for landscapes too, as that is a pretty lightweight lens.

Yes to both. The Z rig is extremely useful in low light

Does this sound like a good kit, given the options available to me?

Absolutely

Of course, if the 800 PF actually becomes available, or the release that Nikon teased today includes the 200-600 with near-term availability, that could cause me to rethink everything!

I'm not losing sleep over the 200-600.its non S line apparently, and who knows when it will materialize.
Nikon must be fully aware of the pressure to not only match but improve on the very solid 200-500 f5.6E,as well as the Bigmas etc. Above all, as many have pointed out the 200-600 awaits a more affordable Z camera but with reliable AF, no blackout etc. Perhaps we'll hear middle of May, but I'm hearing this zoom is planned for later this year.... Pure rumours

 

[agrumpyoldsod]

We’ll be spending a few days each in Madikwe game reserve in S. Africa, another private reserve near Greater Kruger, and Victoria Falls.

The private reserves in SA are much better than the public parks and tend to have better vehicles and far far better guiding/information.

The challenge in SA is always the range of distance between sightings -- some are very very long distance and some can be very very close.

In private reserves you should be able to get out before sunrise to get onto sighting as the sun rises and after dark for night drives (lit by spotlights) -- in the main park you cannot.

Ideally you "need" at least a 600mm on a full frame body -- the 800pf is great BUT you need lenses with much shorter focal length as well. So the 150-600 plus the 800 could make a great pearing.

When you get to the falls take the Helicopter flight and a 20-35mm lens on a full frame AND their are landscape / elephants/giraffe that need wider angle than 150mm

WHAT to avoid -- shooting with cell phones unless you have to for social m vids. Your driver would have to get very very very close to a sighting which is not nice and very irritating for the rest of us. The attached photos show what should not happen -- but the pressure of cell phone shooters made the driver get too close.

WHAT to do -- shoot from as low / close to the ground as you can get and still shoot over grass/bushes. All in the attached images are shooting down on the large leopard and most with far far too short focal lengths. The guy with the blue hat got it about right, bu I would have been kneeling to get even lower.

Weight concerns - really this only affects the internal flight from Joburg - remember to carry on as much of your essential gear as you can and check with the airline. If you are travelling as a family persuade your other family members to carry some of your gear as well. ie spread it about. I found the reality was that weight was a non issue - but others have different stories. The worse case you can check in your gear if there is space in your luggage -- take at least one hard shell suitcase to hold essential gear you cannot take as a carry on.

I buy an extra freight seat if I am concerned about travelling with a lot of gear on internal flights in Kenya -- but you are not going to carry as much gear as crazy as me. What may impact you are carry-on bag size limits.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

GET low

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Gayle]

I rented the sigma 150-600 sport, and the 70-200. I also rented a second camera body so I didn't have to change lenses. When I got home and went through my photos, I did a quick check on the number of images per lens (I'm a data analyst so a bit of a nerd). It was approximate half and half. I also took some landscape photos so had a wide angle with me (yes, I carried WAY too much gear). Some of the lessons I learned:

Don't bring a tripod - a bean bag works well.
Always bring a second camera body! Between the dust and the bumpy drives it seems I had camera problems on an almost daily basis.
If you have a big lens, the people on the trip with you will usually give you the best seat in the vehicle (I wasn't on a photo trip)

Enjoy your trip!

 

[joe43]

I saw this lens in action this past weekend. Ifyou take your Olympus camera, this might be the lens for you. ​

OM System 150-400mm f/4.5 TC1.25x IS Pro. I was very impressed. ​

For a Z9, the 100-400mm S lens with the Z mount 1.4x tc is another choice. I loveusing the 1.4x tc on this lens with my Z9. .

​

​

​

 

[CapIt30]

I have not been to South Africa and do not know those reserves but I have been to Tanzania twice and wanted more reach - especially for smaller critters. On my trips I took the 200-400 f4, but if I were to go again I would take the 800 PF. Based on current delivery of the 800 PF, I think you will have it in the next month and I would take it. On my second trip I had the 500 PF and it was phenomenal. With the 1.4x it maxed out at 700mm but I wanted more for birds (and to capture an aardwolf). I cannot speak to the OM system but with the Z9, my dream line up would be the Z 800 PF, Z 100-400 and the Z 24-120 f4 (along with the 1.4x).

Absolutely on point for Tanzania. If access to 800mm great, but you would also need to use shorter. I had Z 100-400 with 1.4 TC on Z9 (would have better at 700 mm for in camera framing) and Z 70-200 f2.8 on 7ii. A Z 24-70 f2.8 was used several times on Z6ii. (My spouse carried some gear and we had inter-Tanzania flights - you could buy an extra baggage allowance). I wish I had a 600 with 1.4TC. A coleage had her 200-500 on D500 which worked and she also used her 1.5TC occasionally (Rhinoceros at a distance).

 

[bikerx1013]

Finally taking my first trip to Africa in August on a family trip. We’ll be spending a few days each in Madikwe game reserve in S. Africa, another private reserve near Greater Kruger, and Victoria Falls. I‘m trying to figure out what lenses to acquire/bring for the trip, particularly since Nikon has some sales going on Z lenses right now. My biggest question revolves around how much reach one generally needs in Africa, and weight concerns. I’m used to shooting songbirds here on the Texas coast for which no lens is long enough. I’ve had an 800pf on order since day 1 but at this rate I doubt I’ll have it in time, and frankly I’m not sure I need it anymore.

I have both a Z9 and an OM Systems OM-1. I generally bring the OM-1 when traveling due to the smaller size and lighter weight of the body and especially the lenses, but I plan to bring both cameras with me to Africa.

My only long lens for the Z9 is my adapted Tamron 150-600 G2. Aside from the 800 PF I have also been anxiously awaiting the Z 200-600 to replace my adapted 150-600, but at this rate I don’t expect to be able to get my hands on one before August - if it’s even announced by then. I often shoot my 150-600 in DX mode (900mm equiv) for songbirds for the extra reach and smaller file size. Hence the 800 PF preorder. I have a 100-400 for the OM-1, which of course equates to a 200-800. I‘ve no doubt the 800 PF is a superior choice for 800 mm since with the OM-1 at only 20 MP and 200 base ISO it‘s a bit noisier and the cropping possibilities are much more limited. But the Olympus 100-400 is sharper and focuses faster than my adapted 150-600 on the Z9.

So, if I were to bring the OM-1 with my 100-400, would I be better off forgetting about the 800 PF, and leaving my 150-600 at home, in favor of a shorter lens for my Z9? I’m thinking either (1) the Z 100-400, or (2) the Z 400 f4. I don’t own either of those lenses but both are slightly discounted right now. I could easily carry the Z9 with one of these lenses and the OM-1 at the same time in the safari vehicle (as opposed to the 800 PF which probably precludes carrying a second camera). With the 100-400 on my Z9 and the Oly 100-400 on my OM-1, I would effectively have 100-800 mm focal lengths covered. With the 400 f4 I’d only have 200-800 covered, but I’d have a nice, fast prime for 400 mm, and I do have the Z 1.4 TC I could use with it. (I could also use the 1.4 TC with my Z 24-70 f4 if need be to cover shorter focal lengths, but I prefer not to have to mess with switching lenses).

We’re taking some small charter flights between reserves so I’m limited to I think 35 pounds of luggage meaning weight is a real factor (though I can have a family member carry some of my weight). I’m also wondering what focal lengths are most important for Africa. My sense is that it’s bigger animals and you get closer to them so maximum reach is not as important, and having shorter focal lengths may be more important, but I really don’t know. I’d appreciate the thoughts of Steve and the Africa veterans on this board as to which combo makes the most sense. Thanks in advance!

Hi. I recently spent 3 weeks in South Africa , Botswana and Zimbabwe, with my Nikon z5. I did tons of research pre trip, and as a result , purchased ONLY Nikon glass vs tamron and sigma. Focal length ? I read the longer the better. As you know, your safari is costing $$$$$. I didn’t want to economize on lenses. I used my Nikon 200-500 mostly. I brought a TC, but didn’t use it all. staying in private camps will get you really close to the animals. With these big lenses some support is necessary. I used a folded tripod for some stability. Kept between my knees. And I rigged a big sponge with Velcro to the lens to support it on the safari vehicle door. Don’t even try to change lenses in the field. Dust is omnipresent!!! Even in the tents. Swap your lenses as fast as possible. A blower brush is mandatory! I took the small (6 seater) planes too. Don’t worry too much about the weight. Nobody checks. Just don’t go crazy. The MOST important thing to bring is experience and knowledge of your equipment! As soon as you get in the vehicle, pre set your camera! Get ready to shoot! Animals appear and leave in an instant, and when your guide finds a lioness with a cub in her mouth, you won’t have time to turn on the camera, set the shutter speed, f stop, etc. before they retreat into the bush. take advantage of the high fps z9 function! I came back with over 3000 photos. Some came out almost professionally shot! Most didnt. I’m still editing 4 months later. You may also wish to bring a GoPro. I got amazing time lapse photos of sunset and sunrise, and really cool elephant videos with it. Bring small tripod. Steve and the gallery here gave some really good advice for setting your Nikon. Don’t overthink the camera stuff. Enjoy the trip! Start practicing now! Looking forward to seeing your photos. Enjoy!!

 

[Roy]

Finally taking my first trip to Africa in August on a family trip. We’ll be spending a few days each in Madikwe game reserve in S. Africa, another private reserve near Greater Kruger, and Victoria Falls. I‘m trying to figure out what lenses to acquire/bring for the trip, particularly since Nikon has some sales going on Z lenses right now. My biggest question revolves around how much reach one generally needs in Africa, and weight concerns. I’m used to shooting songbirds here on the Texas coast for which no lens is long enough. I’ve had an 800pf on order since day 1 but at this rate I doubt I’ll have it in time, and frankly I’m not sure I need it anymore.

I have both a Z9 and an OM Systems OM-1. I generally bring the OM-1 when traveling due to the smaller size and lighter weight of the body and especially the lenses, but I plan to bring both cameras with me to Africa.

My only long lens for the Z9 is my adapted Tamron 150-600 G2. Aside from the 800 PF I have also been anxiously awaiting the Z 200-600 to replace my adapted 150-600, but at this rate I don’t expect to be able to get my hands on one before August - if it’s even announced by then. I often shoot my 150-600 in DX mode (900mm equiv) for songbirds for the extra reach and smaller file size. Hence the 800 PF preorder. I have a 100-400 for the OM-1, which of course equates to a 200-800. I‘ve no doubt the 800 PF is a superior choice for 800 mm since with the OM-1 at only 20 MP and 200 base ISO it‘s a bit noisier and the cropping possibilities are much more limited. But the Olympus 100-400 is sharper and focuses faster than my adapted 150-600 on the Z9.

So, if I were to bring the OM-1 with my 100-400, would I be better off forgetting about the 800 PF, and leaving my 150-600 at home, in favor of a shorter lens for my Z9? I’m thinking either (1) the Z 100-400, or (2) the Z 400 f4. I don’t own either of those lenses but both are slightly discounted right now. I could easily carry the Z9 with one of these lenses and the OM-1 at the same time in the safari vehicle (as opposed to the 800 PF which probably precludes carrying a second camera). With the 100-400 on my Z9 and the Oly 100-400 on my OM-1, I would effectively have 100-800 mm focal lengths covered. With the 400 f4 I’d only have 200-800 covered, but I’d have a nice, fast prime for 400 mm, and I do have the Z 1.4 TC I could use with it. (I could also use the 1.4 TC with my Z 24-70 f4 if need be to cover shorter focal lengths, but I prefer not to have to mess with switching lenses).

We’re taking some small charter flights between reserves so I’m limited to I think 35 pounds of luggage meaning weight is a real factor (though I can have a family member carry some of my weight). I’m also wondering what focal lengths are most important for Africa. My sense is that it’s bigger animals and you get closer to them so maximum reach is not as important, and having shorter focal lengths may be more important, but I really don’t know. I’d appreciate the thoughts of Steve and the Africa veterans on this board as to which combo makes the most sense. Thanks in advance!

On those safaris the animals are going to be closer than you expect.
Two bodies is great because less switching and less dust in the cameras.
I never used my 800mm and regret lugging it along ...

 

[nealabello]

I've been to Africa once. Tanzania and Kenya so have limited experience compared to some of you folks who go a lot but I got by with a 100-400 zoom with a TC 1.4 on one body and a 24-105 on another body. Many of the animals were so close that the 24-105 was fine. Never had to change lenses so no dust worries.