Good enough lens for safari?

[mhc-art]

Hi all,

At the end of April I’m off to South Africa for 6 weeks of photography & painting, I have bought a Canon 400D with a 17-85 ISM lens and a 100-300 ISM f/4-5.6.

I have read many other threads on the forum related to lens but it does confuse a novice like myself I would like to know if you feel my photography equipment is up for the job. I want good quality photos, I realise that the quality of a pic is very much dependant on the operator but I would like to know if you feel I have the equipment for the job or if I should part-exchange my 100-300 for a better quality lens... and if so what lens would I be looking at?... I know of the 100-400 but that is out of my budget.

The photos I take will be used as reference for paintings and as my style of painting is detailed and involves lots of texture I need my photos to have that same level of detail. I have practiced a little with the 100-300 and I am worried the pics have been a little dull and the zoom may not be enough.

Also, for anyone who has photographed on safari do you have any little tips, like which tripod, etc or any other advice, I have read up a fair bit already but it always good to hear these things first-hand.

Thanks!

[kml]

If it were me and I wish it was!! I would get a longer lens and look either for something upto 400 or 500.(There was a very useful site that showed you how much difference there is between the lenses).There are quite a few on the second hand market for the canon that are alot less than retailers.The online market place is quite good for choice and price,we have brought a few lenses from there and never had a problem.After all you don`t want to get back home from a trip like that and regret not spending the extra on the lens.
Can`t help you with tripod or travel advice but I`m sure someone will,if not
there are quite a few posts on this subject.
Have a good trip and look forward to seeing your art,photo`s on your return.

[Deer Hunter]

mhc-art
Having filmed in Africa I would say go for the longest focal length you can afford. Although a prime lens will give that little bit more quality - I would say take a zoom lens it give you far more scope. a 100-400 is ideal with an extender. However if the bank manager is in agreement take a selection of prime lens 100, 200, 300, 400 etc. etc. Or perhaps wait awhile for the new Canon 800mm at somewhere in the region of eight or nine grand!!!!! - a nice piece of glass.
If my present project is a success I will be getting one! just think at 800mm on a XL H1 filming in 16.9 thats 5760mm ---Wow

[mhc-art]

How much might I be able to get a 100-400?... I presume about £700 and how much would the extender be on top?. As I am not a professional photographer I really cannot justify spending too much on camera equipment, the Africa trip in itself has cost enough...

I was hoping there was an alternative to getting a lens that could still give good results, would an extender be a good option for me?, will that improve my 100-300 enough?... or is my only viable option to go for a 100-400?

Thanks guys!

[GerryNick2]

As far as I am aware the Canon 1.4x extender will not fit your 70-300mm lens so you will need to look at a third party extender such as Kenko which should fit but you will probably loose AF. This would give you the equivalent of a 98-420mm f5.6-8 lens.

Taking into consideration weight, cost and flexibility I would seriously consider a 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 zoom lense for wildlife photography in SA and a 1.4x extender which would give you the equivalent of 140-560mm,the Canon version retails for circa. £900. The Sigma 80-400mm f4-5.6 EX APO DG OS Lens - Canon fit retails at circa.£800. If you give the IS a miss the Sigma 135-400mm f4.5-5.6 DG APO Lens - Canon fit is a budget lens worth considering at circa.£400. A 1.4x extender depending on make can vary between £60 and £200.

Extenders are a cheap option but are mainly intended for use with prime lenses with apertures between f2.8 and f4. See the current thread which gives info on the pros and cons.

Gerry

[RichBrew]

Originally Posted by GerryNick2

Extenders are a cheap option but are mainly intended for use with prime lenses with apertures between f2.8 and f4. See the current thread which gives info on the pros and cons.

Gerry

Gerry's pretty much said it all, here, but also bear in mind that any flaw that the main lens has will be magnified by the extender. If the lens suffers from chromatic aberration, or exhibits severe barrel or pincushion distortion at either end of its zoom range, for example, these anomalies will be all the more apparent with a teleconverter. TC's have their uses, but are not a panacea for inadequate focal lengths.

RichBrew

[mhc-art]

Thanks guys!... I'm hoping that other thread may give me the solution I'm looking for

[wildlifesnapper]

Hi

have you looked at the Tamron 200-500mm , compact and sharp.

neil

[mhc-art]

I've looked into a few other lenses like the Tamron and Sigma but the favourite is the canon 100-400mm, I haven't seen one bad review of it!.. so it must be good...

My real concern for the trip to Africa is that I will not have the equipment for the job and I'll miss out on some very good shots. As I've said before I am an artist and to a degree my paintings will only be as good as my reference.

I currently have a 17-85 ISM lens and a 100-300 ISM f/4-5.6, and hopefully I will have the 100-400mm. Does this cover most of what I need or will I be wishing I'd bought another lens?.... and if so what lens and should I think about part-exchanging my 100-300 for it?

[mhc-art]

Just wanted to know what a good price is for a used 100-400mm and what should I look out for regarding its condition?... one I've seen for example said it had fungus... I'm guessing that's not good!.. anything else?, I have seen some for £550 from the US/Canada but most are in the £700-800 region