Abuttolph wrote:
I will be going to Maasai Mara (private conservation/concession area) for two weeks next August, followed by a week in Tanzania. The Tanzania portion will be a combination of wildlife and landscape photography. This thread has been incredibly interesting and informative. Thank you to everyone for sharing your experience.
I am still working on a gear list. Just sold my A7R IIIA in order to buy a second A1. My E-mount lenses at this point include the Sony 200-600, Tamron 35-150, and Tamron 17-28. I was very happy with these lenses and two bodies (A1 and A7r IIIA) in Namibia. However, I would really like to get input if these will be good enough for my upcoming trip. I guess that my main questions, in consideration of wildlife photograph, would be: would the Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 II give me any kind of edge (thinking focal length, obviously it would be better for frame rate) over the Tamron 35-150 that would warrant taking both? How important is a third body?
Added note: I do want to make the absolute most of this trip. It is becoming very expensive and likely a once in a lifetime trip. So, I really do want to buy or rent appropriate gear and not be caught lacking. ...Show more →
Are you going with someone who can help carry a portion of the carry-on gear? If yes, you should be covered to bring as much gear as you want. I brought 80lbs of gear between 2 people, not including regular luggage for clothing. Being that you are staying in a National Park, I might think about bringing longer glass like a 600 f/4. If you were staying in a a conservancy, I would have suggested a 400 f/2.8 for sure. I might still think about a 400 2.8 in a National Park but it might leave you short if you can't drive off road. As for your Tamron 35-350, I would leave that at home and bring 3 A1's with your 17-28, 70-200, 200-600, and 600 f/4. You can leave all three bodies attached to the longer glass 99% of the time and swap one out to the 17-28 when you want to shoot a wide shot. If you only want to bring two bodies, I would still bring that same lens lineup.
I just went back and reviewed the guide's website. He only mentions Canon and Nikon lenses for rent, unfortunately. Entim Camp (https://www.entim-mara.com) is where we will be staying the entire time and they have the gear for rent. I will email them and ask about Sony gear. They really seem to be set up well for photographers, so it is very possible that if they don't have Sony gear now that they may acquire some in the coming months. Will update to this thread with their answer - may take a day or two.
I assume you're going with David Lloyd? Fantastic photographer.
artsupreme wrote:
Are you going with someone who can help carry a portion of the carry-on gear? If yes, you should be covered to bring as much gear as you want. I brought 80lbs of gear between 2 people, not including regular luggage for clothing. Being that you are staying in a National Park, I might think about bringing longer glass like a 600 f/4. If you were staying in a a conservancy, I would have suggested a 400 f/2.8 for sure. I might still think about a 400 2.8 in a National Park but it might leave you short if you can't drive off road. As for your Tamron 35-350, I would leave that at home and bring 3 A1's with your 17-28, 70-200, 200-600, and 600 f/4. You can leave all three bodies attached to the longer glass 99% of the time and swap one out to the 17-28 when you want to shoot a wide shot. If you only want to bring two bodies, I would still bring that same lens lineup....Show more →
berimbolo wrote:
Is the 600F4 too long for the conservancies?
I don't think there is any wrong telephoto in the conservancies starting on the low end with a 70-200 because there is wildlife in each focal range as you can drive closer or far away to position yourself based on your focal length. For example, sometimes I put either my 1.4x or 2x on my 400 just to mix it up and shoot at different focal lengths. I was completely fine at 560 but less fine at 800 because of heat shimmer. So when I had one camera setup for 800mm I was looking for smaller animals that were closer to me, instead of distant animals where you need the reach. 80-90 percent of the time when shooting 800mm I would experience atmospheric distortion unless it was at first light. This might be different during a cooler part of the year. With that said, I like to stay at 400 and drive closer to the animals, and most importantly benefit from the f/2.8 for low light . I was even fine at 300mm most of the time as we would just drive as close as I needed to setup the shot with my 100-300.
But with my experience in the National Parks you can't drive off road and position yourself closer (most of time). They are either close to the road or they're not. That's why I might bring a 600 if I was headed to NP's. If you shoot birds, I would probably bring the 600 in conservancies, but I still found many birds and eagles in range at 300-560.
artsupreme wrote:
I don't think there is any wrong telephoto in the conservancies starting on the low end with a 70-200 because there is wildlife in each focal range as you can drive closer or far away to position yourself based on your focal length. For example, sometimes I put either my 1.4x or 2x on my 400 just to mix it up and shoot at different focal lengths. I was completely fine at 560 but less fine at 800 because of heat shimmer. So when I had one camera setup for 800mm I was looking for smaller animals that were closer to me, instead of distant animals where you need the reach. 80-90 percent of the time when shooting 800mm I would experience atmospheric distortion unless it was at first light. This might be different during a cooler part of the year. With that said, I like to stay at 400 and drive closer to the animals, and most importantly benefit from the f/2.8 for low light . I was even fine at 300mm most of the time as we would just drive as close as I needed to setup the shot with my 100-300.
But with my experience in the National Parks you can't drive off road and position yourself closer (most of time). They are either close to the road or they're not. That's why I might bring a 600 if I was headed to NP's. If you shoot birds, I would probably bring the 600 in conservancies, but I still found many birds and eagles in range at 300-560. ...Show more →
Thanks.
Looking at my shots from the National Parks, almost every shot was at 600mm.
artsupreme wrote:
Are you going with someone who can help carry a portion of the carry-on gear? If yes, you should be covered to bring as much gear as you want. I brought 80lbs of gear between 2 people, not including regular luggage for clothing. Being that you are staying in a National Park, I might think about bringing longer glass like a 600 f/4. If you were staying in a a conservancy, I would have suggested a 400 f/2.8 for sure. I might still think about a 400 2.8 in a National Park but it might leave you short if you can't drive off road. As for your Tamron 35-350, I would leave that at home and bring 3 A1's with your 17-28, 70-200, 200-600, and 600 f/4. You can leave all three bodies attached to the longer glass 99% of the time and swap one out to the 17-28 when you want to shoot a wide shot. If you only want to bring two bodies, I would still bring that same lens lineup....Show more →
I will need to handle all of my own carry-on gear, but it could be divided into two different bags, one of which has wheels. That may well be what I have to do.
Thanks for the lens advice. As much as I like that 35-150, the 70-200 does seem like the better choice and makes a lot of sense. I am hoping to be able to rent a fast prime.
I may be limited to two bodies, but three would certainly be awesome for having three lenses at my fingertips at all times.
Abuttolph wrote:
Yes, I am going with David Lloyd. Really love his work and I look forward to learning from someone like him.
I actually considering going with him in Feb, but decided to avoid traveling during cold/flu season after I got sick during a workshop in October. I am considering attending a trip with him in August, but I will likely organize on my own.
berimbolo wrote:
I actually considering going with him in Feb, but decided to avoid traveling during cold/flu season after I got sick during a workshop in October. I am considering attending a trip with him in August, but I will likely organize on my own.
If you do go with him in August, let me know. I am booking two consecutive weeks with him then. If I had previously been to Kenya, I would most likely organize on my own as well. After one trip to Namibia together on a photo tour, a couple of friends and I are organizing another trip there on our own.
Abuttolph wrote:
If you do go with him in August, let me know. I am booking two consecutive weeks with him then. If I had previously been to Kenya, I would most likely organize on my own as well. After one trip to Namibia together on a photo tour, a couple of friends and I are organizing another trip there on our own.
David is actually the cheapest option for staying at Entim. I think this time around, I will try to avoid the river crossing. I didnt see anything there in September, and it kind of killed 2 game drives. Youll have better luck staying at Entim since its right beside the crossing sites.
Abuttolph wrote:
I will need to handle all of my own carry-on gear, but it could be divided into two different bags, one of which has wheels. That may well be what I have to do.
Thanks for the lens advice. As much as I like that 35-150, the 70-200 does seem like the better choice and makes a lot of sense. I am hoping to be able to rent a fast prime.
I may be limited to two bodies, but three would certainly be awesome for having three lenses at my fingertips at all times.
If you are going on your own you are probably limited to two bodies and two bodies also makes more sense if you are sharing a vehicle. Depending on which airline you are flying their max weight allowance for carry-on is probably 33lbs between two bags. Rarely do they weigh it, but there is always a chance someone will try to ruin your day and put it on the scale. I would prepare for that and weigh everything at home so that if you do encounter someone having a bad day then you can still avoid checking gear by filling a vest inside your bag. Just make sure you know your bags weight 33lbs without your vest inside.
berimbolo wrote:
David is actually the cheapest option for staying at Entim. I think this time around, I will try to avoid the river crossing. I didnt see anything there in September, and it kind of killed 2 game drives. Youll have better luck staying at Entim since its right beside the crossing sites.
And he seemed somewhat apologetic that he had to raise the prices for next year owing to the higher cost of pretty much everything. That was my thought as well in terms of better luck. Plus, frankly, I did not want to be at a crossing with 50 other safari vehicles. Might as well do it right. Hope you get some great shots even without the river crossing. I am particular to the cats and do hope to get some nice shots. David offers a Big Cats photo tour at another time of year and it looks so tempting, plus being in a different season, it is less costly.
artsupreme wrote:
If you are going on your own you are probably limited to two bodies and two bodies also makes more sense if you are sharing a vehicle. Depending on which airline you are flying their max weight allowance for carry-on is probably 33lbs between two bags. Rarely do they weigh it, but there is always a chance someone will try to ruin your day and put it on the scale. I would prepare for that and weigh everything at home so that if you do encounter someone having a bad day then you can still avoid checking gear by filling a vest inside your bag. Just make sure you know your bags weight 33lbs without your vest inside....Show more →
Two bodies may well be what I end up taking. Besides the bulk and handling, I am not a large, particularly strong, or young person, so having more weight than I can reasonably deal with is not great. I could handle up to 33 pounds distributed over two carry-on bags with no problem though.
That is a good reminder about the possibility of bags being weighed. The only times that I have ever had my carry-on bags weighed was in the Brussels airport for a Qatar Airways flight, and in Windhoek when leaving Namibia. Most of the time I fly Delta and they have never weighed my carry-on bags.
Abuttolph wrote:
Two bodies may well be what I end up taking. Besides the bulk and handling, I am not a large, particularly strong, or young person, so having more weight than I can reasonably deal with is not great. I could handle up to 33 pounds distributed over two carry-on bags with no problem though.
That is a good reminder about the possibility of bags being weighed. The only times that I have ever had my carry-on bags weighed was in the Brussels airport for a Qatar Airways flight, and in Windhoek when leaving Namibia. Most of the time I fly Delta and they have never weighed my carry-on bags.
Okay, well at least you've been called out before so you know what could potentially happen if they weigh your bags and they are overweight. It's rare, but it happens. With all your accessories, laptop, chargers, batteries etc you will probably be close to 40lbs with just the two bodies, 17-28, 70-200, and 200-600. Renting a fast tele while there would be ideal for you if it's possible. Good luck.
I was able to get the following into a bag for 24lbs:
200-600
70-180
A1
A9
Macbook Air
6 batteries
2 SDDs
Charging bricks for laptop and camera batteries
Lens wipes
Medications
I put some smaller items in the jacket and vest I wore onto the plane. I also packed 1 lens in my checked bag. I put it in its own protective bag and then in a packing cube surrounded by socks in the centre of the suitcase.
Abuttolph wrote:
That is a good reminder about the possibility of bags being weighed. The only times that I have ever had my carry-on bags weighed was in the Brussels airport for a Qatar Airways flight, and in Windhoek when leaving Namibia. Most of the time I fly Delta and they have never weighed my carry-on bags.
Very common in Australia (Qantas domestic) and New Zealand. Also in Tahiti and by Lufthansa just about anywhere they feel that the plane is full or your bag just looks big (even if it fits in their sizing box).
Someone said: " Besides the bulk and handling, I am not a large, particularly strong, or young person, so having more weight than I can reasonably deal with is not great. I could handle up to 33 pounds distributed over two carry-on bags with no problem though"
32lbs of gear in a Thinktank Airport Advantage Roller. Best move I ever made so as not to carry a backpack. Weighed at Wilson and on FedAir.
Greetings from Tanzania - last day here in Arusha...raining daily up to several hours per day (and more at night as the temp cools).
We've had a great time meeting local people via birders and self-employed guides (see photo) or just shopping in the local market where locals shop etc. See photo below - see the white guy me...don't look at him, instead the person to his right: Isaac Kisulu a Maasai guy, the best bird guide in Tanzania (uses sound to bring birds in). Anyway, with him and on our own (and not in a National Park or protected area or private re$erve) we've got some animals and birds very close.
Birders, Tanzania and some random white guy
Garnett's Greater Galago
Secretary Bird...pretty close as in full frame
Beesley's Lark - you are looking at 1 of about 150 remaining (known) individuals
