African Safari - Nikon 24-120mm f/4 + Nikon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

AlanDB

AlanDB

Member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
We are starting to plan a 40th wedding anniversary trip to South Africa and whilst this is *not* a photography expedition, my wife fully encourages me on these trips to do some semi-serious photography ;-) Anyways, I have been a (mostly) landscape photographer for a number of years now - but as I approach retirement I want to start picking up wildlife photography (birding in particular). And for this trip, mostly mammals of course, I'd like to bring appropriate gear. We will be staying at (mostly) private game reserves - and from what I've seen that can result in a lot of close-in photography as you can get quite close to the animals on game drives. But, of course, you also need some distance. (sigh). I currently own the 24-120 + 100-400 (+ 1.4TC) for my Nikon Z9. [Before retirement I am looking into a long prime lens for birding - maybe the 600 or 800 PF?]

In my research I've seen a lot about (a) needing faster lenses for early morning/evening times, (b) that you really need to get to 600mm if at all possible, and (c) having two set ups with you can really make a big difference. To that end I am thinking of renting a Z8/Z9 as a second body and taking these two lenses. I know w/ the 1.4TC I get to 560mm w/ the 100-400mm - and I can DX it into a 20MP 840mm f/8 lens at the touch of a button. My thoughts are to have the 24-120mm on the rented body and the 100-400mm on the Z9 in lower light situations and add the 1.4TC when the light is better. [That would give me a focal distance range of 24-400/600mm(DX) in low light and 24-560/840mm(DX) in good light]

The question is then: would I really suffer during the low-light periods w/ the relatively slow lenses - f/4 at best, f/5.6 at worst? Should I really be thinking of dropping the (say) 24-120mm and renting some fast-ish prime instead?
 
Member's gallery
You will get many, many varying opinions on this topic, so consider mine just one among several. I've made roughly 15 trips to Africa, however, so I have a bit of experience. On my most recent trip (2022), also spending some time on a game reserve, I took only my 24-120 and my 200-500. Were there times I wanted more reach? A few. Were there times in late evening when I wished I had a faster lens? A few. But, I am not afraid of a little noise in order to get a shot, so I simply increase the ISO. Plenty of ways to fix that in post.

In my opinion, you will get the most benefit out of a second body, having each body with a lens mounted and ready to go. Things happen quickly on a game drive. You might spot a rhino 200 yards out and want the reach of your 100-400, then right around the corner encounter a group of lions 30 feet from your vehicle. I had these exact experiences during my last trip. The animals will not wait around while you change lenses. And, dust is everywhere in most of southern Africa.

Plus, when people think "Africa" they immediately think "big telephoto for great distances." Africa is much more than that. The 24-120 will let you capture the glorious African sunsets, vast landscapes and interesting closeups. It is also ideal for portraits of the beautiful, highly interesting native peoples you will encounter (always ask if it is OK to take their picture). I personally would not consider a fast prime to be a better option; what focal length to choose? I would not trade flexibility for another f-stop.

I used to take several lenses on such trips that I might "need," only to find out that I rarely did. Every extra pound matters when you're traveling long distances. IMHO, a second body is more critical than multiple lenses, both for the reasons mentioned above, and in case of mechanical failure. You might also consider a good monopod and gimbal setup, which is easy to use in a vehicle or on foot, and helps compensate a bit for "slow" lenses. With the two lenses you have, plus TC, plus the option for DX, unless you are strictly interested in birds, you will have most everything you might encounter covered pretty well.

Enjoy your trip. Africa is wonderful on many different levels.
 
Member's gallery
I am pretty seasoned in African safaris, will have my 1st on of this year next month from 4 in total. I travel with 2 bodies and 2 lenses with lenses being the 100-400mm and the 600mm prime. Now, as you wrote that you are not (yet) a wildlife photographer but the 2 lenses you had in mind will do fine and will give you most of the pictures you are after.
Another potential combo is the 70-200 f/2.8 lens paired with the 180-600mm but your backpack will be getting bigger and for sure heavier.
EDIT: I missed the info you might go for either the 600 or 800mm PF lens. My personal preference here would be the 600mm, that lens is pure gold :)
 
Member's gallery
Thanks for the wonderful feedback - We're currently looking at 12 nights in South Africa - 4 near the southern end of Kruger National Park (3 five-hour private game drives into Kruger). 4 nights up north in Selati (where will take 6-8 3-hour game drives). Then 4 nights in northern Sabi Sands (again, 6-8 3-hour game drives). We might cut that back a bit, but that's where we currently are. We are currently targeting June 2025 - so that gives me time to rent and try out some gear. In particular, I'll probably rent a Z8 + 600PF and try that combo out. At least I've got a pretty good feeling now that worst case the 24-120/100-400 is a decent option.
 
Member's gallery
AlanDB said:
Thanks for the wonderful feedback - We're currently looking at 12 nights in South Africa - 4 near the southern end of Kruger National Park (3 five-hour private game drives into Kruger). 4 nights up north in Selati (where will take 6-8 3-hour game drives). Then 4 nights in northern Sabi Sands (again, 6-8 3-hour game drives). We might cut that back a bit, but that's where we currently are. We are currently targeting June 2025 - so that gives me time to rent and try out some gear. In particular, I'll probably rent a Z8 + 600PF and try that combo out. At least I've got a pretty good feeling now that worst case the 24-120/100-400 is a decent option.
Click to expand...
I like birds and small animals so personally would go with the Z8/600mm PF, the 100-400mm on another body and your phone for the closer stuff. Just my thoughts. I loved Sabi Sands and I prefer the 4 nights at each lodge so you don't have to spend as much time traveling between lodges. And presumably the 3 hour game drives give you several hours mid-day to recover. So your plans sound great to me.
 
Member's gallery
AlanDB said:
Thanks for the wonderful feedback - We're currently looking at 12 nights in South Africa - 4 near the southern end of Kruger National Park (3 five-hour private game drives into Kruger). 4 nights up north in Selati (where will take 6-8 3-hour game drives). Then 4 nights in northern Sabi Sands (again, 6-8 3-hour game drives). We might cut that back a bit, but that's where we currently are. We are currently targeting June 2025 - so that gives me time to rent and try out some gear. In particular, I'll probably rent a Z8 + 600PF and try that combo out. At least I've got a pretty good feeling now that worst case the 24-120/100-400 is a decent option.
Click to expand...
Kruger Park itself can be wonderful with animals very close but you can equally get slow days or animals at great distance. In the Kruger park itself is there strict no offroading but places like Sabi Sands, one of those private concessions forming the Greater Kruger National Park are parks where you have your guide and perhaps tracker that bring you close to the animals.
You have indeed plenty of time to sort out your gear choice and that is also part of the journey, debating what gear to take :).
FWIW, I am also not a fan of TC's and for sure not on s tele zoom lens. Do not forget to take a basic cleaning set with you (swipes, brush, rocket blower and sensor swaps) and a couple of spare batteries. On the long drives perhaps not bad to take an MH-34 charger (for those EN-EL15x batteries) with you and a 20.000mAh power bank in case you go quick through your batteries.
June is a dry month so do not bother that much with protection against rain even so an occasional shower can happen in this ever changing weather shift.
 
Member's gallery
Thanks again folks!

Once I get some time w/ the Z8+600PF that will help me quite a bit I think.

The good thing is that between drives I'll have time to offload images & recharge batteries, and for sure I'd take back up batteries for both bodies. [My understanding/experience w/ the Z9 is that I should have no problem w/ a 3-5 hour shoot on one battery, but I won't take the chance ;-) ] My wife and I will each carry along power banks - she'll be non-stop on her iPhone, and I'll be paranoid and wanting to make sure I've got enough power "just in case" .

Vincent: Good point about Kruger Park - to be honest, we hadn't even thought of that - but one of the tour operators I am interacting with made that as a suggestion, and I was thinking that might not be a bad thing to see. I may end up punting that and taking a couple of more nights in Sabi Sands or Mala Mala instead. We'll see.

I really appreciate all the great feedback!
 
Member's gallery
The Kruger itself can be wonderful. It is also so many diverse landscapes that hosts different animals. Giraffes, and for sure zebras, for instance I found much more relaxed in Kruger compared to the private concessions. I would definitely include a few days, just for the experience. You never know what will cross your path, exactly what a safari should be :)
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Alan…I’m taking those same two real soon with Steve…and am also taking the 600PF and both TCs. The 1.4 I have zero issues using withy either of the teles…the 2x needs decent light to overcome the loss of course but in good light it works just fine if you just can’t get closer. While faster lenses re nice…weight considerations make them a no go for me…and with todays NR software high ISO really isn’t the big bugaboo that some say…yes, it introduces more noise but software helps a lot.
 
Member's gallery
I've never been to Africa, but I've done a lot of wildlife photography in Alaska and the continental US, and a lot of traveling National Park photography in general. It strikes me that there are a number of competing variables. 1) do you have a specific type of photo in mind? Close up portraits? Environmental images? Landscapes? 2) are you limited to the roads? I know in parts of Africa, as in parts of Alaska, you're severely restricted to the road net. In other parts you have more location freedom. 3) Are there weight/size restrictions? Small planes in particular sometimes impose limits. Etc etc

I've used the combo of the 24-120 and 100-400+TCs on several trips, including a recent winter trip to Yellowstone. Traveling by snowcoach, restricted to roads. The combination worked well and I never felt the need for anything more than 400mm+TC14+DX crop.

A recent article left me thinking. The statement was that you'll never have all focal lengths and options covered (add macro? add tilt-shift? add flash?) and you should try and determine what shots are going to be of greatest interest/appeal to you and make sure you have *those* covered. Also consider fallbacks for equipment failure (I had a zoom lens jam so it couldn't handle the lower part of its range, but I had another lens that could cover that angle of view/perspective).

I'm going through this exercise preparing for a trip with a 40lb *total* limit on all luggage. I'm still having fits...
 
Member's gallery
I would recommend the following combination:

70-200mm f2.8
400mm f4.5 prime
1.4x tc


Those two lenses are extremely high IQ lenses and both can make good use of the 1.4x tc. For distant shots I would add the 1.4x tc to the 400 which gets you out to 560. From there you will still have the ability to crop to get a subject that will not fill the screen.

Both of those lenses are easy to maneuver handheld and also have pretty wide apertures which will help you with background rendering.

The reason I prefer the 400 f4.5 to a zoom lens is the extreme sharpness in this lens gives you substantial ability to crop significantly or go dx and still get satisfactory results. You can even use a 2x tc on these lenses which means the 400 will do 800.
 
Member's gallery
I've never been to Africa but it is definitely on the list. The one thing I would think is constant - ensure you have 2 bodies. You do not want to be swapping lenses in such a dusty environment. And as I understand it, action and animals can change rapidly. There may be no time to swap lenses even if you wanted to.

As you brought up in the OP, the 24-120 f4 and 100-400 f4.5-5.6 are both relatively "slow" lenses. They will certainly get the job done, but you will also certainly run into points in time where you're unable to shoot keepers - while others around with you with f2.8 lenses will be able to.

Only you can decide what the value of that experience is. Will you ever come back to Africa? If so, will you come back on a more wildlife-centric trip? How much money are you willing to throw at this trip, given that it isn't designed to be wildlife-centric?

If this is truly not meant to be for wildlife, and you don't care that much - I'd say just get 2nd body and take what you have. You're probably near the point of diminishing returns. A couple extra thousand thrown at lenses isn't going to net you that much more than what you have.

If you do care more about wildlife, or perhaps do not have plans to come back to Africa, or have some disposable income - I'd suggest trying to get some faster lenses.

The combo that Wotan mentioned above would be fantastic.

70-200mm f2.8
400mm f4.5 prime
1.4x tc

you could also go wider (and cheaper) with something like the Tamron 35-150 f2-f2.8.

from what I've read of other African trips, 800mm is probably too long unless you're explicitly shooting birds. the 600PF would probably be a good focal length, but again - "slow" at f6.3.

I don't think you can go wrong either way you choose, and hope you enjoy your trip
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I suspect the time of year and location greatly affects whether or not there is a large risk of dust and contamination when changing lenses.

I have been to Africa 4 times....and never found it very dusty. So Africa and Botswana in Sept, Kenya in late August, Chobe in early Sept and mid-late May, and Tanzania in early March.
 
Member's gallery
Just remember, you usually do not need a super fast lens for elephants, giraffes, hippos, rhinos and zebras unless they are running at you. :) Also the 100-400 will give you sharpe images throughout the zoom range.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
jerrylwatson said:
Just remember, you usually do not need a super fast lens for elephants, giraffes, hippos, rhinos and zebras unless they are running at you. :) Also the 100-400 will give you sharpe images throughout the zoom range.
Click to expand...
I think that general concern w/ fast lenses has to do with (very) early morning and into the evening shooting - when you'll have much less light and very dark shadows.
 
Member's gallery
AlanDB said:
I think that general concern w/ fast lenses has to do with (very) early morning and into the evening shooting - when you'll have much less light and very dark shadows
Click to expand...
I would prefer a wider aperture lens for other reasons besides the ability to shoot in low light situations. I think with less wide lenses I can adjust by shooting at a higher iso and using denoise in post to clean up the image. I have gotten surprisingly sharp images at high ISO numbers using a high IQ lens.

My main concern in seeking a wider aperture is to control depth of field and gain subject separation from background. The wider aperture lenses generally do a better job with detuning background and the most expensive lenses are legendary in this area.

The other concern is with the use of teleconverters. Each time you add a teleconverter the lens loses aperture. For instance, with the 600mm pf, shooting with a 1.4x teleconverter brings the maximum aperture from f/6.3 to f/9. Put the 2x teleconverter on that lens and you are now out at f/13.

So a super wide aperture lens has a much better ability to take advantage of teleconverters. The 600mm tc vr has a native max aperture at f/4. Adding a 1/4x teleconverter brings it to 840mm at f5.6. There is no generally commercially available lens that shoots at 800mm with a wider aperture than f5.6 that i am aware of.
 
Member's gallery
Other members have given great lens advice so I will not cover that here, other than to say if you are truly interested in birds a long lens definitely helps for the smaller very beautiful birds you will encounter. Make sure you let your guide /driver know you are interested in birds as many guests are not so they assume you are there for the ‘big five’ but in my experiences there they love to show guests all of the beautiful birds. I remember one outing when I mentioned this to the guide others in the jeep audibly groaned , but by the end of the outing everyone was madly snapping images of stunning birds.
Lastly as others have said two bodies is so important either in case you break one , and/or so you do not have to change lens as the dust can be insane. I carry a $20 plastic dry bag so if I have to change a lens in an open jeep I put the camera and lens in bag and change inside without looking. Never had a dust issue. Learnt this tip from a professional wildlife photographer ; don’t ride in the jeep with your camera and lens in your hands waving it around . Everyone loves to hold and show off their $15k prime lens’s , but you keep it in all in your Knapsack on your seat covered with top unzipped and as soon as yon see an animal you will have plenty of time to flick it open and start shooting. While others now have to wipe their lens filters from dust or even forget that the 2 km drive to get to the animals made their lens a dusty mess, your happily shooting with a pristine kit.
Have a great trip.
 
Member's gallery
I have a similar “dilemma “ as I’m going to South Africa NEXT WEEK!
We are on a ship, with at least 5 planned all day safaris .
for the safaris I’ll use the z8+ z180-600. Otherwise it’ll be the z24-120 f4. I’m not taking the 2x as I’m concerned about dust.
I will have another camera with a 55mm prime for towns , nights etc.
Then on board the ship. I’ve also got a very wide angle, approx 15mm
 
Member's gallery
A couple of things. First, I have used the Z 100-400mm zoom and the Z 600mm TC on my recent trips to Africa, each mounted to a Z9. I have rarely, if ever, wanted a to use a different lens. I do not recommend using DX mode on the Z8 or Z9, as that doesn't "give you more reach", it just crops pixels away from your image. Get closer, if you can, and use FX mode. The only exception is when you have a truly rare subject at a distance and the subject detection has trouble locking on. Sometimes changing to DX mode will result in a quick lock on to the subject. Lastly, with regard to dust, I, too, keep the cameras in a lightweight "semi-waterproof" bag, when I am not using them. I did have an interesting problem once, however. My viewfinder stopped working properly. After a frustrating time looking at everything I could think of to get it to work, I noticed that it was quite dusty. I cleaned of the dust, and the viewfinder immediately started working properly again. Just something to keep in mind.
 
Member's gallery
I completely agree with BirdDogDad. I only went once, with every lens I had so I wouldn't miss a shot. I used the 500 f4 most of the time and very often it was too much lens. I also used the 70-200 a lot. When I go back, I would be 100% comfortable with your two lenses and TC. As he said, you might feel here and then you with you had a different lens, but for the extra cost, weight and hassle of having more gear, the 5 or 10% of "I wish" wouldn't be worth it for me, especially on a non-exclusive wildlife trip.
 
Member's gallery
The likely camera to subject distances can vary widely depending upon where you go on that continent. I would decide first where you want to go and then get feedback from the operator as to what you will encounter.
 
Member's gallery
On my last safari which was split between self-driving in the Kruger and a lodge in the Sabi Sands I used a Z9 with my 100-400 + 1.4TC attached for the whole time. Although I also had a Z6ii and 24-70 this stayed in my bag almost the whole time. Given the heat and dust I'm not sure that a focal length greater than 540mm would have been helpful and the handling of high ISO by the Z9 meant that I did not miss the extra weight and bulk of a faster lens despite the relative lack of subject isolation.
 
Member's gallery
I made my first trip to Africa in June-July last year - 16 days in Kenya. I was quite happy with the gear I took - Nikon Z9 and Z6ii; Z 40mm, Z 24-120mm, Z 100-400mm, and TC 1.4X. 100-400 was attached to the Z9 the whole time with 1.4X added a few times. I hardly used 40mm; 24-120mm was on the Z6ii almost the whole time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top