Alternative long lens strategy

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).

RichF

RichF

Well-known and Infamous Member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
I shoot with Z9 and Z8 and my wife shoots with only Z 8. For an upcoming trip to Africa here are some lens combination we are considering. In all cases 24-120 lenses to cover the wide to short telephoto range.

Alternative 1: 180-600 and either 70-180 or 70-200 (plus TC 1.4 Z). Have not testing the 180-600 with 1.4 but heard it is okay

Alternative 2: 180-600, 800 PF, 70-200, TC 1.4Z. Gets 800 and 1100+ covered very well (better IQ). Adds an extra big lens.

Alternative 3. 600 TC and 100-400 w/ TC. 600 TC is big beautiful lens. 100-400 w/ and w/o TC will cover routine shooting, only need 600 TC for far away subjects and small birds. w/ the 100-400 + TC giving me 560, will mostly use the 600 w/ TC which brings me to the next alternative.

Alternative 4. 800 PF and 100-400 w/ TC. Similar to Alt 3 but lighter weight, a bit less flexible but basically covers the same range.

Here are my thought - I would like to hear yours.

Alternative 1. Lightest weight. could replace 70-200 w/ 100-400 to give me fall back in case the 180-600 fails (breaks).

Alternative 2: Not sure how often I will need to get beyond 600. Will try to back the bag to see how well they travel and how heavy.

Alternative 3: WEIGHT. not sure I want to take that much

Alternative 4: Simplified version of Alt 2. Replaces the 70-200 and 180-600 w/ 100-400 w/ TC (140-560).

How about Alternative 999: sell everything and use my phone 🤣
 
Member's gallery
Which part of Africa are you going to? I. E dense bush or open Savanna. If its the latter then favor the big boys. Remember most animal viewing will be in the early morning or late afternoon evening.
 
Member's gallery
Location as was asked?
Intent with images - large prints or not?
Do you have two Z8?
For all alternatives - thoughts about low light? How important is that 600 at f4 to you?

I kinda like the Alternative 4 if not looking for large prints and not worried about low light. Simple to execute.
 
Member's gallery
I prefer alt 1, but that's because I value the flexibility. I can also confirm the 180-600 is still great with the 1.4x, but it's slower so not ideal for super low light situations without pushing higher ISO/lowering shutter speed. How much of an issue that is will be up to you.
 
Member's gallery
Z8 /W Z400 TC, Z9 /W Z600 TC, 70-200 f2.8 in the bag /w 1.4 TE. Leave the 24-120 home and use the phone for anything it would have been used for..
 
Member's gallery
BRKpics said:
Which part of Africa are you going to? I. E dense bush or open Savanna. If its the latter then favor the big boys. Remember most animal viewing will be in the early morning or late afternoon evening.
Click to expand...
Tanzania. In particular in the crater and Serengeti, we can not go off road so longer lenses are needed
 
Member's gallery
mdirvin said:
Z8 /W Z400 TC, Z9 /W Z600 TC, 70-200 f2.8 in the bag /w 1.4 TE. Leave the 24-120 home and use the phone for anything it would have been used for..
Click to expand...
400TC would overlap with the 600 w/o TC 400 TC and 800 PF. Or 180-400 TC and 800 PF?
 
Member's gallery
BarkingBeansCoffee said:
Location as was asked?
Intent with images - large prints or not?
Do you have two Z8?
For all alternatives - thoughts about low light? How important is that 600 at f4 to you?

I kinda like the Alternative 4 if not looking for large prints and not worried about low light. Simple to execute.
Click to expand...
Jane as 2 Z 8, I have two Z 9s and two Z 8s. Started w/ 2 Z 9s for travel and found had trips where I wanted to go light, so I added Z 8s. I would say we are spending our kids inheritance but we don't have kids so that helped us financially.
 
Member's gallery
Cameron T said:
I prefer alt 1, but that's because I value the flexibility. I can also confirm the 180-600 is still great with the 1.4x, but it's slower so not ideal for super low light situations without pushing higher ISO/lowering shutter speed. How much of an issue that is will be up to you.
Click to expand...
I don;t mind using NR software. I am willing to push the ISO 12,800 if needed (rather not)
 
Member's gallery
RichF said:
400TC would overlap with the 600 w/o TC 400 TC and 800 PF. Or 180-400 TC and 800 PF?
Click to expand...
There are two shooters, you and your wife. One would be able to take the closer subjects, the other the farther one. In between both could be shooting.. With a third body the 70-200 /w TC 1.4 attached could be immediately available to whoever grabbed it first...
 
Member's gallery
mdirvin said:
There are two shooters, you and your wife. One would be able to take the closer subjects, the other the farther one. In between both could be shooting.. With a third body the 70-200 /w TC 1.4 attached could be immediately available to whoever grabbed it first...
Click to expand...
martially bliss would prevent that ..if you know what I mean
 
Member's gallery
Good discussion. I'm planning for a trip to South Pole right now, going in November. I have the 180-600 but I think it will make my pack too heavy for me to lift. I'll probably rent a 100-400, I'm taking two z8 cameras. I'm thinking of buying a 100-400 as it is a different lens then the 180-600, I can shoot much closer for nature type shots (not animals) and it is lighter but not sure yet if I'll do that. I am spending my son's inheritance but he'll be fine without whatever I spend. I'm thinking the 500PF will be the second long lens due to the light weight and the z24-120 for close-up. These are definitely "first-world" problems! I know when I was in Africa most shots were far away but often the cats, in particular, would come very close to the vehicle so a zoom would have been better than the 500PF I used most of the time. It's always a guess.
 
Member's gallery
I always wonder, are you looking to sell your images or enjoy them with family and friends? F&Fs would have me pick Alt 4 for convince and less juggling of gear. F&Fs will enjoy anything you come back with. Any prints You make later should be fine.
IMHO,
Vinny :)
 
Member's gallery
RichF said:
I shoot with Z9 and Z8 and my wife shoots with only Z 8. For an upcoming trip to Africa here are some lens combination we are considering. In all cases 24-120 lenses to cover the wide to short telephoto range.

Alternative 1: 180-600 and either 70-180 or 70-200 (plus TC 1.4 Z). Have not testing the 180-600 with 1.4 but heard it is okay

Alternative 2: 180-600, 800 PF, 70-200, TC 1.4Z. Gets 800 and 1100+ covered very well (better IQ). Adds an extra big lens.

Alternative 3. 600 TC and 100-400 w/ TC. 600 TC is big beautiful lens. 100-400 w/ and w/o TC will cover routine shooting, only need 600 TC for far away subjects and small birds. w/ the 100-400 + TC giving me 560, will mostly use the 600 w/ TC which brings me to the next alternative.

Alternative 4. 800 PF and 100-400 w/ TC. Similar to Alt 3 but lighter weight, a bit less flexible but basically covers the same range.

Here are my thought - I would like to hear yours.

Alternative 1. Lightest weight. could replace 70-200 w/ 100-400 to give me fall back in case the 180-600 fails (breaks).

Alternative 2: Not sure how often I will need to get beyond 600. Will try to back the bag to see how well they travel and how heavy.

Alternative 3: WEIGHT. not sure I want to take that much

Alternative 4: Simplified version of Alt 2. Replaces the 70-200 and 180-600 w/ 100-400 w/ TC (140-560).

How about Alternative 999: sell everything and use my phone 🤣
Click to expand...

Wow Rich, I am also going to Tanzania, leaving Nov. 1! Still trying to decide about going to the crater. Do you really think it is worth it? The two other people I talked with were discouraging about going there. When are you leaving for Tanzania? Maybe will see you there (haha).
I actually asked my photo guide (Sebastian, who is great) whether it is worth bringing the 800mm lens and he said yes, definitely! So I am in the same situation as you, only want to bring two cameras (unlike you, only have a Z9 and a Z8) and potentially two lenses. My current decision is the 70-180mm plus the 800mm and use the iPhone for the grander scenic photos (wide angles). But you or someone else can convinced me otherwise.
 
Member's gallery
For Tanzania especially the Serengetti, if I were going back (i have been there) I would take one Z camera with a prime 600mm or 800mm. The second Z camera would have the 100-400mm on it possibly with the 1.4xtc. If I did not own a 100-400mm, I would take a 70-200mm f4 or f2.8. I would take the 24-120mm too. A 300mm f4 pf could be used in lieu of the zoom. My two favorite lenses for safari: Nikon 70-200mm f4 (much lighter than the f2.8) and a long tele, focal length depending on your location. Minimum 500mm; 600mm better; 800mm might be needed.

These would work well at Tarangerie and Ngorogoro crater too.
 
Member's gallery
ricardo00 said:
Wow Rich, I am also going to Tanzania, leaving Nov. 1! Still trying to decide about going to the crater. Do you really think it is worth it? The two other people I talked with were discouraging about going there. When are you leaving for Tanzania? Maybe will see you there (haha).
I actually asked my photo guide (Sebastian, who is great) whether it is worth bringing the 800mm lens and he said yes, definitely! So I am in the same situation as you, only want to bring two cameras (unlike you, only have a Z9 and a Z8) and potentially two lenses. My current decision is the 70-180mm plus the 800mm and use the iPhone for the grander scenic photos (wide angles). But you or someone else can convinced me otherwise.
Click to expand...
We are going a month later. Crater is great. Hard to shoot there due to strict rules about driving off road (enforce is stringent there). Need the extra length there. In the serengetti park vs conservation area, you also need to stay on the road but it is less well patrolled so sometimes guides will risk it. Conservation area anything goes though guides like to stick to the road when possible.

The gap between 70-180 and 800 is dramatic. Unless you want lots of animal-scapes I would bring something to fill in the range, I find I seldom shoot below 200 except for landscape shoots (which could be iphone shots)
 
Member's gallery
RichF said:
We are going a month later. Crater is great. Hard to shoot there due to strict rules about driving off road (enforce is stringent there). Need the extra length there. In the serengetti park vs conservation area, you also need to stay on the road but it is less well patrolled so sometimes guides will risk it. Conservation area anything goes though guides like to stick to the road when possible.

The gap between 70-180 and 800 is dramatic. Unless you want lots of animal-scapes I would bring something to fill in the range, I find I seldom shoot below 200 except for landscape shoots (which could be iphone shots)
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info. So thinking of skipping the Crater? I will have the 400mm f/4.5 lens (plus TCs) so if I decide that is more useful, will have the 400mm lens on one camera and the 800mm on the other. Or the 400mm on one and the 70-180mm on the other. And for sure will often wish I had the other but no way I want to bring 3 cameras.
 
Member's gallery
If I was going…I would go with both my Z8 and Z9 and the 180-600 (if it’s here by whenever I would be going) and the 70-200 along with the 2 TCs…although the 2x would be a just in case thing. If it’s not here…I would take the 400/4.5 and the 70-200. Probably stick in the 24-120 as well and if space/weight allowed perhaps the 14-30 but would more likely just do a pano with the 24-120 if I needed wider than 24. Primes are better optically of course but lack flexibility…and if your output is either screen or say up to 16x20 prints theyre aren’t going to be much better with the primes IMO so I would go with flexibility. These always DX mode of course but I prefer to crop in post and for my almost exclusive display output I see no significant differences between the prime I had (500PF) and the zooms with or without the TC…and the differences I do see are more ‘different’ than ‘better/worse’…at least with the 1.4. The 2.0 is a bit more better worse but still acceptable to me but I would mostly shoot with the 1.4 and crop in post unless the only way to get a shot was use the 2.0…it’s a cheap insurance policy for me.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I would not skip the Crater. We saw lots of animals in the crater and got some great pictures. And our camp site was close by and afforded some interesting photo ops too.

If I had a 180-600mm lens it would be in my bag for a trip to Tanzania.
 
Member's gallery
John Navitsky said:
i know nothing about this kind of trip, but why consider the 70-180 or 70-200 while taking the 24-120? if it’s low light you could also consider the tamron 35-150 instead
Click to expand...
Ya know…that’s an interesting observation…and with an iPhone 13 or later or the equivalent Android phone…maybe the 24-120 stays home for weight and toss the 14-30 in instead for wide landscapes but I would have to ask myself and others who’ve been how likely I would need that one. For those of you who’ve been…much use for a 14-30 and is the 24-120 worth taking along?
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
The Crater is normally only open 6am to 6pm - and it takes at least 15 minutes to drive to most of the wildlife in the bottom of the Crater - eliminating dawn and dusk photography - except for one lodge with it's own private entry.
It is normal to get within 6 feet of a lion in parts of the Crater - making the 24-120 important. Very long lenses are not critical.

The 70-180 does not have VR and at 180mm IBIS may be worth less than 3 stops. Unless you are about 3 to a vehicle with access to a bean bag I would not take it.
If you are not concentrating on birds and weight restricted the 100-400 with TC 1.4 can be enough.
My 2 telephoto choices would be 100-400 and 180-600.
 
Member's gallery
RichF said:
400TC would overlap with the 600 w/o TC 400 TC and 800 PF. Or 180-400 TC and 800 PF?
Click to expand...
Do you have a 400 TC as well? Not having been to Africa, take this with a pinch of salt, but here in India, light is at a premium out in the forest. In addition to that, you often only sight animals in poor(ish) light. I would consider carrying the 24-120, 100-400, 400 TC, 1.4 TC and 2TC; you are covered in poor light, you have the ability to shoot habitat compositions, animal portraits, birds, landscapes, maybe throw in a 40 F2 for some low light self portraits for the memories.

If you don't have the 400 TC, then I would chose the 24-120, 180-600, 600TC for the low light flexibility and the ability to shoot 600 and 840 mm at the same time as opposed to carrying the 800 PF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top