Safari photography

[katielegg24]

I'm thinking of going to Kenya next year on a photography safari holiday. Something I've wanted to do for a looooooong time!

I've only had my first dslr for 6 months (canon 70d) so I'm still learning a bit on the 'what lens' front. I'm thinking of hiring a lens for the trip and wondered if there was any advice on what sort of focal length I should be looking for?

Also if anyone has recommendations on where to hire in London...

[Mike Buckley]

Especially considering that you're relatively new at deciding what focal length is a good fit for you, I recommend a 70-300mm zoom. My wife and I also use cameras with a crop factor. While on safari, she used a 70-300mm zoom and shot almost entirely at the long part of that range. I used only prime lenses and about 80% to 90% of my images were shot using the 300mm lens. Almost all of the others were shot using an 85mm or a 180mm lens. I shot only three images using anything smaller, which explains why I recommend the 70-300mm zoom.

[davidedric]

Hi,

Mike's recommendations make sense, but what works best is dependant on location.

I have done lots of safaris, though not in Kenya. May I suggest that you plan out your trip in a bit more detail, and ask again.

WARNING: Safaris can be addictive, and the Africa bug may bite. We just keep being drawn back.

Dave

[Manfred M]

The last time we did a trip like that was almost exactly four years ago, where we spend four weeks in Namibia. My wife and I were shooting Nikon D90 cameras (APS-C sized sensor, similar to yours). I shot with a 80-400mm lens and she used a 150-500mm lens. Both were the right choice. I would agree with Mike that the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM focal length to use with your camera is lens with a focal length of 300mm at the long end.


In the interim, we've also done some wildlife shooting in Ethiopia, India and Nepal, as well as in Canadian National and Provincial Parks. The cameras have changed a bit, although my wife is still shooting the D90, I've used both full frame and mFT sensor cameras on these trips. I wouldn't change the recommended focal lengths at all and if you can afford something with a longer focal length, then go for it!

All that being said, there are a few major complications when shooting longer lenses when out in the wild on a safari:

1. A longer focal length lens has a narrower field of view, so it is much, much more difficult to hold the lens steady to compose. I virtually always shoot Shutter Priority mode (Tv for the Canon folks) and use image stabilization. I would say I would rarely (unless I was able to stabilize the lens somehow) shoot at shutter speeds below 1/500th sec, and usually higher if I could.

Often these safaris take you out around sunrise and sunset, because the animals are more active then and you can sometimes see the nocturnal ones before the go and sleep for the day, so this makes photography even more challenging. Higher ISO settings and apertures that are quite wide will be needed too.

Learning to hand hold at long focal lengths is critical to success. Quite often you won't be able to use any type of stabilization device like a tripod or monopod, so practice hand holding your camera lots before heading out on a trip. A large camera and heavy lens is actually easier to use than a smaller lighter one.

2. I find that long lenses and complex (multi-point) autofocus rarely work well together. I do most of my shooting with a single point autofocus and use a technique often called "focus and reframe". Here I focus (generally on the animal's eye that is closest to the camera, lock focus and reframe the shot so that I get the composition that I want. This takes a bit of practice to master, but in my opinion is really the best way to photography wildlife.

3. Practice lots before you go. Try to get to a zoo, if there is one near you and if not, get out into the country and photography horses and cows as a proxy for large game.

[rpcrowe]

If you are going to rent a lens, think about the 100-400mm f.4.5-5.6 IS zoom...

OTOH, my son-in-law shot some pretty decent safari images with a Canon SX50-HS bridge camera. Although that would not be my choice for a safari camera...

[katielegg24]

Wow some fab pictures!

The travel I got a bit hooked on over the last couple of days was an Exodus 6 day safari into the Masai Mara but this was all kicked off by attending a seminar by Exodus a few weeks ago about endangered animals. I'm not precious really about where I go but figured 6 days would be a good intro length and more affordable to see if I really like it.

I have a 70-300 so it's interesting to know that 300 could be OK. I'd just hate to come back and find out that for a few £ I could have been happier with the outcome.

Thanks so much for the tips on taking the shots too. I had a bit of a go at Longleat a few months ago but have learnt SO much more since I think a few trips to London zoo would be sensible!

I've also read a few things about taking 2 bodies so your not changing lenses often. I don't know if this is really an option for me as I don't have a second one, could hire... Happy to have the sensor cleaned after but wondered how essential you think this is...

Dave are the any pills I can take to prevent the addiction? I feel like I might have already got on the slippery slope with only having done the research online!!!

[William W]

If you are sticking with Canon Lenses and considering renting, then the EF 100 to 400 F/4.5~5.6 L IS USM makes the best sense to me.

A few points:

> It's a zoom
> 400mm is the longest zoom Canon makes (##see below) and is better than 300mm for distant subjects
> 100mm is not that much longer than 70mm: if the Subject is too close for 100mm it likely will be too close for 70mm anyway
> the (original) 100 to 400L is an "old lens": rental establishments have plenty of them (here anyway) likely less expensive than renting a 70 to 300L (if you look at renting a Canon 70 to 300 then I suggest only the L version)

(##)I'd price renting the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Ext 1.4x (probably much more expensive but you never know until you ask)

Another possibility is to buy a good quality, second hand 100 to 400L and sell it when you get back home: I suggest that you do the maths on that suggestion - get a price for renting.

If you do rent (this is very important) rent it for a week or two weeks BEFORE you leave and take it to the park; sports oval; large country area with a freeway running through it - any large expanse where there are moving things so you can practice - there are several elements and techniques when using this lens with which a beginner might need to acquaint themselves, including but not limited to: Camera Holding in both Orientations; Push Pull Zooming; Use of IS; Varying Maximum Aperture; Uses of Tripod Mount.

Consider buying/renting a MONOPOD (and maybe a specialist Monopod Head).

***

What other lens(es) do you have?

WW

[katielegg24]

Thanks for this, a bit more again for me to consider here. The two lenses I have are the 70-300 usm IS and the 18-135 IS stm...

Forgive a bit of ignorance... What is the L version?

[davidedric]

Hi again,

For photography in the Mara, I think 70-300 on a crop camera is the best general lens. There will always be times when you wish you had a bit more reach, especially for birds, but you also need to be realistic about What you can hand hold in a shared vehicle (which I assume is what Exodus will arrange).

I would not bother with a second body, but if you have a mid-range zoom I would take that. As well as the wildlife you'll want shots of the general landscape and environment, and you'll normally have plenty of time to change lenses. You'll also want shots around the camp, and of the fascinating people you are going to meet - I suggest something in the 17-70 range would do the job.

I doubt the Mara allows night drives, but I would still take a flash. You never know!

I certainly endorse Manfred's suggestion of single focus point, focus and recompose.

Of course you will want to take the best photos you can - but you are also capturing memories. I have many images that don't pass muster as technical masterpieces, but still take me back somewhere special.

Fortunately there are no pills, though it does sound as if you might be at risk. As well as the sights, once you add in the smell of the bush and the sounds of the African night, you are likely a goner.

I know you'll have a great time - and we look forward to seeing some pictures!

Dave

[Shadowman]

The itinerary details what types of animals might be spotted, but it doesn't really state where the tourists will be positioned. I doubt if anyone will be existing the vehicle too often for most of the sightings, perhaps so for the bird sightings but perhaps not for the wilder (hyenas, rhinos, leopards) animals.

http://exodusafricansafari.com/safar...s-mount-kenya/

[Mike Buckley]

Manfred mentioned the need for a shutter speed at least as fast as 1/500 and I agree. Though there are exceptions when you can get away with 1/200, you never know when an animal that is even sleeping may suddenly move fairly fast in a short motion when you would want to stop the action. Even so, if you're using the long end of your range of focal lengths, you'll need to ensure that your shutter speed is fast enough to allow hand holding the longer focal length.

I and my wife always shot using Aperture Priority so we could easily control depth of field. We ensured the minimum shutter speed by using Auto ISO and configuring whatever that speed needed to be. She would leave her minimum shutter speed configured to accommodate the long end of her zoom and I would change mine depending on the focal length of the prime lens and the type of photography I was doing. The two most extreme examples were landscapes and animals that were running. Even so, I usually left the minimum shutter speed required to stop the action of moving animals to ensure that I didn't miss a shot of a scene that would rather quickly and unexpectedly occur.

Having been on two safaris when there was little vegetation on branches of the bushes, I'm sure I would not enjoy it as much as when everything is in full vegetation. That's because it's so much easier to spot the animals when the vegetation is sparse. Even if the animals aren't in a good position to photograph, it's very enjoyable to simply see them in their natural habitat. The issue of vegetation of course depends highly on the type of vegetation growing where you go on safari.

[davidedric]

The itinerary details what types of animals might be spotted, but it doesn't really state where the tourists will be positioned. I doubt if anyone will be existing the vehicle too often for most of the sightings, perhaps so for the bird sightings but perhaps not for the wilder (hyenas, rhinos, leopards) animals.

No, you won't be exiting the vehicle except for carefully selected tea or toilet stops. Things can happen pretty quickly out there!

So long as you keep your body profile low (i.e. don't stand up, don't put your leg out the side, don't wave your arms) , most animals don't recognise that there are human animals around. You can get right up close to lions for example. But they can certainly spot it if you do break cover.

Dave

[Shadowman]

No, you won't be exiting the vehicle except for carefully selected tea or toilet stops. Things can happen pretty quickly out there!

So long as you keep your body profile low (i.e. don't stand up, don't put your leg out the side, don't wave your arms) , most animals don't recognise that there are human animals around. You can get right up close to lions for example. But they can certainly spot it if you do break cover.

Dave

Hi Dave,

I mentioned the position of the shooters because all recommendations didn't seem to consider position of the shooter. When I visited the Rhathambore National Park (India) for the purpose of spotting the elusive tiger, most of the tour was conducted from the safety of the vehicle, however we did stop and exit the vehicle for what was considered a safe area. Also, some safaris I would imagine might be staged from an outpost or even by use of a blind; providing the Exodus itinerary reduced the possible assumptions we sometimes make.

[Krawuntzel]

Thanks for this, a bit more again for me to consider here. The two lenses I have are the 70-300 usm IS and the 18-135 IS stm...

Hi Katie
based on my safari experiences (since 1988 every year) mostly in Tanzania but also in Masai Mara I would say that your two lenses are allright and you will come back with breathtaking pictures - if you do not want to capture extremely small birds. I do not know anything about Canon - so I cannot give any tips.
Around 90% of my wildlife pictures are made with a 300mm/f2.8 prime lens on a APS-C camera

What I always found more important than camera/lens is:
- what type of safari car the company you mentioned is using (open or opened roof?: I personally prefer the ones with an opened roof, because you can steady your camera with a bean bag)
- how many and what persons will be in this car (with some of the occupants insisting to go back to camp/lodge for an early lunch, just when the "action" is becoming interesting).
And to the "mal d'afrique" : when you disembark the plane in Nairobi, you will have it - or not (with or without pills).
Hope you will have a wonderful time
Erwin

[rpcrowe]

For photography in the Mara, I think 70-300 on a crop camera is the best general lens. There will always be times when you wish you had a bit more reach, especially for birds, but you also need to be realistic about What you can hand hold in a shared vehicle (which I assume is what Exodus will arrange).

IMO, my son-in-law achieved very decent images with a minimum of gear because he had contracted for an individual safari vehicle for him and his father to shoot from. This was expensive but went a long way to ensure that he could get decent images.

I have seen images of safari vehicles that are so crowded that IMO, even with top-line gear, if would be difficult to achieve top-line images. And it would be frustrating as heck for me to try that route.

If I can make an analogy: Here in California we have several ways to ocean fish. The least expensive is the party boat (often called a cattle boat) in which fishermen are lined up elbow to elbow along the rails.


This is IMO a terrible way to fish since many of our fish are relatively large and fight extremely well. This results in tangles and lost fish. Additionally, since the party boat is the cheapest way to fish the ocean, many of the fishermen aboard are inexperienced which increases the line tangles. A private boat or a six-pack (commercial boat with six passengers or less) is a far better (but more expensive) way to go...

I would assume that this would also be applicable for a safari photo tour. Riding in a vehicle with six to ten (or more) other photographers of various experience and shooting with P&S cameras and cell phones would be as frustrating to me as fishing on a "cattle boat". I would rather not fish than fish on a "cattle-boat" as I would rather not go on a safari if all I could afford would be a "cattle-vehicle".

[rpcrowe]

I just checked on U.K. lens rental

http://www.lensesforhire.co.uk/search

The original 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS lens costs 55 pounds for 3 days while the version II costs 81 pounds for three days. Either of these rentals for the duration of a safari and transit time (plus a couple of days to practice) would be quite expensive.

I searched eBay U.K. for completed auctions on the original 100-400mm lens. Many have sold for between 500 and 600 pounds. I would expect that you could purchase a used 100-400mm lens from eBay, pay for it with PayPal and return and resell the lens before you ever needed to pay for the PayPal purchase. I would also expect that you could sell the lens for very close to what you would have paid for it. if you lost a bit of cash, I don't think that it would be as much as the rental cost for the lens over a safari duration of time.

[Mike Buckley]

Riding in a vehicle with six to ten (or more) other photographers of various experience and shooting with P&S cameras and cell phones would be as frustrating to me as fishing on a "cattle boat".

My four days of experience of using an open vehicle comfortably sat ten people other than the driver. There were three bench-style seats that sat three people each. A chair next to the driver sat the tenth person. Each bench was higher than the bench immediately in front of it and the front bench was higher than the area where the driver and tenth guest sat. So, there was no problem being able to see the animals and general scenery.

That's so true that after having sat in every bench on the vehicle except the chair next to the driver, there is no way to know in advance which position will be the ideal position. That's partly because you don't know what you're going to see and when you're going to see it and partly because an effective driver will reposition the vehicle after awhile to ensure that a particular scene has been available to everyone before leaving.

The people ranged in photography experience from two people extremely experienced photographing safaris using DSLRs to children being on a safari the first time using their cell phone. And there was everything in between. I found every minute of every excursion extremely enjoyable both as a casual observer of the wild and as a serious photographer. The photographic experience of others in the vehicle neither enhanced nor hindered the success or enjoyment of my photography.

[Shadowman]

Two very thought provoking videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4t0aeTX954

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CNgwZgoKFc

[William W]

. . .The two lenses I have are the 70-300 usm IS and the 18-135 IS stm...
What is the L version [of the 70 to 300]?

Canon have (I think) three 70 to 300 Lenses in the EF Series:

EF 70 to 300 F/4~5.6 IS USM (the one, I expect that you have)
EF 70 to 300 F/4.5~5.6 DO IS USM
EF 70 to 300 F/4~5.6 L IS USM

*

As a general comment about Canon lens(es) to take with you and especially considering Richard's research apropos the cost renting a 100 to 400L, I think that it is clearly a choice between either using the 70 to 300 lens that you have or you buy a second hand 100 to 400L with the view to selling it when you return (or selling the 70 to 300).

I think that the 70 to 300 will produce good images for you. Much more depends on your skills and the initiatives that you take, than the difference between the lens that you own and using a 100 to 400L.

That stated, the 100 to 400L is a better lens than the one that you own and IF you do choose to get a 100 to 400L then get one sooner rather than later so that you can become familiar with using it. No one else can make that choice for you. I suggest having a look and a play with at a 100 to 400L because the size and weight of it is a consideration also.

*

Considering other lenses: the 18 to 135 will be adequate for daylight hours for Subjects/Objects closer to you.

Considering the reasonable quality High ISO capacity of the 70D, the 18 to 135 lens will be suitable for some low light and night time Available Light photography, also.

On that particular subject, my personal preference would be to have a fast 24 ish to 35 ish Prime Lens for Available Light opportunities when the Subject / Object is at closer range (likely when on Safari that would be either Portraiture or Interior Architecture shots, rather than wildlife).

For an APS-C camera the EF 35 F/2 is a low cost and fast Prime Lens which is very good for the uses I described: but a Fast Prime Lens is NO use to you, if YOU do not have uses for it.

Enjoy your Safari and make great Photos.

WW

[Manfred M]

Just going through the archives, I found some video I shot in Namibian's Etosha National Park a few years ago.

I set the video camera on a tripod just before sunset and shot until I got bored. This was taken at Namutomi Camp, so I was not in a vehicle and as the sun went down the artificial lights went on and the lighting got pretty bad. I shot this with a Panasonic AF100 video camera using the Nikkor f/2.8 70-200mm lens. The camera has a mFT sensor with a 2x crop factor.