Reading mode: Light Dark

Going on Safari - but which camera XS-1 or Nikon D700?

Go to last post
Agreed . You always need a bigger lens , I Know I do :)

The OP asked what we thought where the better choices. Between the D700 and the X-s1.





However If I had the choice of a 300mm lens on a FF and a 600mm on a 2/3 sensor I would choose the 300mm.

A lot depends on the safari . In Kenya on some of the reserves the game truck is driven quite close to the game so the 300mm would be fine for the larger game and some of the smaller mammals. It would be to short for small birds but I would hate to try doing birds with the X-1S. Remember the animals are quite big and the truck get to about 20-30m away , some times closer.




A 500/600mm is not the best lens to use if you only use one camera. Game can get big on you very quickly and a elephants eye ball is very uninteresting. :) That's why I use 2 cameras one with a long zoom and one with a short/wide zoom.




These where take last year at kruger. Here you are not allowed to go off road up to the animals.


146723483.aMG9GPFQ.1024hyhena6P6112770.JPG


146268395.zfxfM2Dk.1024xele331P6153802V.jpg


146724465.A8xIGnN2.800giraffe301aP6153423.JPG


146724756.CbPk1KCn.1024bab100bP6103052.jpg







146268398.8qOaH9tk.1200ele332e2P6153804V.jpg










Yes it is nice to have a long lens to take some thing 500m away ( 1000mm EFV) like this but as a said you can get closer.

146924347.XY0SrhsW.1400yzeb206aP6164952V.jpg





From the previous year 2011


139493234.x1rsHUxD.1024xP5014742V.jpg


140391827.ySkwzU4a.1024WEAVWE110aP5057645.jpg


140358694.OuVnld2n.1024rh403P5078690.jpg


Cheers Collin




--
Collin

(Aficionado Olympus DSLR )

www.pbase.com

Galleries by Collin Baxter

www.pbase.com

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. (George Carlin)

New Seventh Wonder of the World.
 
One of my favourite cameras to date was my old E3. Interesting you have the E-620 in there, both myself and Labe were saying just the other day that we get better pictures with our X-S1's than we did from our E-620's so if you've not used an X-S1 you will get an idea of the IQ.

The X-S1 is also better at higher ISO than that old Oly sensor, I used to cap my E3 & E620 at ISO400.

Here is a cropped SOOC shot from my E3 with the 50-200mm, I loved that lens.

afca4699ddde4f65afe139009da0f119.jpg

I found this from the wildlife centre, another typical set-up for shooting at 30ft.

d3e9833f46644f2fb3569a8ff062e93c.jpg




--
The 10% Rule:
You Must Be 10% Smarter Than The Equipment You're Operating
 
Last edited:
2nd degree said:
2nd degree wrote:

Yeah. As others have said a complete new camera system wouldn't be feasible. The EM-5 is a beautiful camera though. Love the retro look
Click to expand...
Pretty, but that's all the good that part is.
2nd degree said:
and the IQ is fantastic.
Click to expand...
Your Nikon has fantastic IQ. A micro 4/3 camera is not quite so fantastic. A FF camera has about 3.5 times the surface area of a 4/3 and that is a big difference.
 
Last edited:
painterdude said:
painterdude wrote:

just one more comment re the XS-1 vs the 700. I just went shooting with a friend who owns that Fuji. We shot exactly the same stuff ..only I was using the relative cheap 70-300VR on my DSLR. In close the XS-1 does okay ..but the 70-300 more than matched it ...and completely creamed the XS-1 when wound out to its softest 300mm. This was hand held and shot as the boat was moving away. I cannot post what my friend shot but I can assure you it was way softer than this. If you are on Safari what you need is a sharp lens at full zoom. From what I have seen and I could be wrong, the XS-1 does not perform even as well as a consumer grade zoom on a DSLR.
Click to expand...
You are correct. It does not match a decent basic dSLR with a kit zoom. Not. Even. Close.
 
DS21 said:
DS21 wrote:
DS21 said:
papillon_65 wrote:
DS21 said:
painterdude wrote:

just one more comment re the XS-1 vs the 700. I just went shooting with a friend who owns that Fuji. We shot exactly the same stuff ..only I was using the relative cheap 70-300VR on my DSLR. In close the XS-1 does okay ..but the 70-300 more than matched it ...and completely creamed the XS-1 when wound out to its softest 300mm. This was hand held and shot as the boat was moving away. I cannot post what my friend shot but I can assure you it was way softer than this. If you are on Safari what you need is a sharp lens at full zoom. From what I have seen and I could be wrong, the XS-1 does not perform even as well as a consumer grade zoom on a DSLR. Yes this DSLR is a smokin good one ,..but its huge pixel count pushes lenses to the limit and makes getting sharp shots more challenging. Here's my 300 mm shot for what its worth.






--
http://skylightvistas.weebly.com/index.html
Click to expand...
He may have had an earlier model with the softer lens. My X-S1 would easily match that, no problem whatsoever, in fact it's better at the long end at F5.6 than any consumer telephoto I've used in that range. I suggest you look here, these shots will show you exactly what the X-S1 can do at range. This guy has now changed to a the Nikon D600 and a long telephoto lens but his X-S1 shots, in many cases, look better to my eyes.

--
For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
Click to expand...
The image quality of the boat picture is on a complete different level (much higher), then the X-S1 gallery you linked to. I don't know who are you kidding here. Lovely subjects, yes, but soft in fine detail and drab in color, and displayed in 2 MP size.
Click to expand...
You can view this shot at 100% and it is still nice and sharp and 'clean'. You can't view small sensor shots at 100% and have that same ability, not that I've seen.

--
You don't TAKE a photo, you MAKE a photo.
 
2nd degree said:
2nd degree wrote:

Thanks for the compliments Midwest. Well I've slept on it. I will take my D700 and the D80. The intention is to shoot wide with the D80 and keep the 70-200 and TC on the D700. I can always swap if I need the extra reach.

My wife can use the D80 (in dreaded auto!) so its not like I'll be carrying two cameras. I'll double check everything is fully insured which will give me some peace of mind.

Mmm, I suppose I could sell the D80 and D700 and put it towards a D800 but thats for another forum!!!

Once again thanks for all your help from the (completely non biased) Fuji Forum.
Click to expand...
I don't own a Fuji, nor do I own a Nikon (well, a couple in my collector's case) but I read various forums including this one. You've made an excellent decision. You might consider renting a longer zoom or tele if you want more reach, but your Nikon stuff will deliver the goods and you know that for a fact. No 'should, could, probably will' about it.

People telling you that you would be satisfied and get good shots with an X-S1 don't want to post any of theirs at 100%, I don't suppose.

I hope you have a great trip!
 
Last edited:
OpticsEngineer said:
OpticsEngineer wrote:

I do not know. I have an XS1 and a Sony A65. I was on safari in Kenya about ten years ago, but only had an early digital camera and a Minolta film camera.

The thing I really like about the XS1 is very good image stablization, and that I see the stabilized image while I set up my shots. But I would think that for safari, I might really appreciate having a high quality DSLR.

But on my A65, the stabilization only kicks in when I click the shutter. And then the viewfinder goes black. So I never see the effect of the stabilization while taking the photos. On safari, the camera is also serving you as a telescope so you can see things. So the A65 is not suitable that way.

I do not know if the D700 is better about that. I would appreciate any comments others might have on that topic. I am guessing that LiveView in some DSLRs provides the effect of being able to see a stabilized image while taking photograph but I simply do not know. But that is the main thing I would be concerned about for going on safari. If no DSLR actually does that, I would actually bring my XS1 instead.
Click to expand...

As I understand the A65 it has in-body stabilization and an EVF (electronic viewfinder).

The Nikon (as would be the same with a Canon) has optical stabilization (in the lens). When you half-press the shutter the image stabilizer kicks in and stabilizes the image in the viewfinder. (It also stabilizes the image for the autofocus and metering, which likely helps those functions work better.) When you take the shot for an instant the flip of the mirror blanks the viewfinder, but only for a small fraction of a second.

When I bought my Canon and then found out that some other brands had in-body stabilization I thought I'd made a mistake. But in-lens is usually more effective and it stabilizes the image I have to work with. Now that I understand the comparison I'm glad to have what I have.
 
Midwest said:
Midwest wrote:
Midwest said:
2nd degree wrote:

Yeah. As others have said a complete new camera system wouldn't be feasible. The EM-5 is a beautiful camera though. Love the retro look
Click to expand...
Pretty, but that's all the good that part is.
Midwest said:
and the IQ is fantastic.
Click to expand...
Your Nikon has fantastic IQ. A micro 4/3 camera is not quite so fantastic. A FF camera has about 3.5 times the surface area of a 4/3 and that is a big difference.
Click to expand...
EM5 w/ 100-300 Panny ...it ain't too bad...I have owned a 7D and 100-400 as well...

http://acwilli.smugmug.com/Other/EM5-Soccer/26075379_rQM7BB#!i=2165544081&k=FFjc6Nj


at ~70 ft (20m) (420mm EFL)..jpeg PP'd with Windows Photo Gallery...


http://acwilli.smugmug.com/Other/EM5-Soccer/26075379_rQM7BB#!i=2165567074&k=ThJ6nqk&lb=1&s=O




PA200478-X3.jpg


--
--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...
 
Last edited:
Midwest said:
Midwest said:
DS21 wrote:
Midwest said:
papillon_65 wrote:
Midwest said:
painterdude wrote:

just one more comment re the XS-1 vs the 700. I just went shooting with a friend who owns that Fuji. We shot exactly the same stuff ..only I was using the relative cheap 70-300VR on my DSLR. In close the XS-1 does okay ..but the 70-300 more than matched it ...and completely creamed the XS-1 when wound out to its softest 300mm. This was hand held and shot as the boat was moving away. I cannot post what my friend shot but I can assure you it was way softer than this. If you are on Safari what you need is a sharp lens at full zoom. From what I have seen and I could be wrong, the XS-1 does not perform even as well as a consumer grade zoom on a DSLR. Yes this DSLR is a smokin good one ,..but its huge pixel count pushes lenses to the limit and makes getting sharp shots more challenging. Here's my 300 mm shot for what its worth.






--
http://skylightvistas.weebly.com/index.html
Click to expand...
He may have had an earlier model with the softer lens. My X-S1 would easily match that, no problem whatsoever, in fact it's better at the long end at F5.6 than any consumer telephoto I've used in that range. I suggest you look here, these shots will show you exactly what the X-S1 can do at range. This guy has now changed to a the Nikon D600 and a long telephoto lens but his X-S1 shots, in many cases, look better to my eyes.

--
For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
Click to expand...
The image quality of the boat picture is on a complete different level (much higher), then the X-S1 gallery you linked to. I don't know who are you kidding here. Lovely subjects, yes, but soft in fine detail and drab in color, and displayed in 2 MP size.
Click to expand...
You can view this shot at 100% and it is still nice and sharp and 'clean'. You can't view small sensor shots at 100% and have that same ability, not that I've seen.

--
You don't TAKE a photo, you MAKE a photo.
Click to expand...
You can with the old Fuji's, F10, F11, F30, F31, and even F200, but it is only 6 Mp. But I guess pixel peeping is not looked at favorably in this forum since the X10/X-S1 arrived.
 
papillon_65 said:
papillon_65 wrote:

yet again, my key points are this:

You ranted at LTZ about his comment on using the E-M5 and as good as accused him of being a "fanboy" later on. LTZ is a very good photographer who uses a number of brands so your comments were little uncalled for and I called you on it. Nothing too exciting there, I just didn't like it so I commented, as I'm free to do.
Click to expand...
I didn't rant at anybody, but whatever. You felt the need to chime in even though I'm quite sure your LTZ is perfectly capable of voicing his own opinions. But for whatever reason, you felt the need to chide me even though I wasn't the one suggesting the OP buy a whole new kit when he already owns a professional DSLR. But whatever make you happy.
papillon_65 said:
You do not need high end expensive gear to shoot Safari's and get excellent images that will print to a decent size, A3 for instance, the X-S1 or the E-M5 or any number of smaller cameras will do it very well.
Click to expand...
On what for many may be a once in a lifetime trip, you bring the best gear you can bring, end of story. You carry what cameras you think you need, and I'll do likewise, but for the love of god, let it go.
papillon_65 said:
You do not need C-AF focusing to capture moving animals. Yes it can help but it is not the be all and end all and many cameras don't do it very well anyway.
Click to expand...
For the 100th time, yes you do. That's what C-AF is there for: moving subjects. If you want only 1 or 2 images of an 9 shot sequence to be sharp, then by all means, use AF Single Shot. Whatever works for you, stick with it (even if there are better ways to do it). No offense but I truly don't care anymore.
papillon_65 said:
I realise the OP has made his choice and good luck to him, I'm sure he'll be fine. I know I could shoot a Safari quite happily with the X-S1 and get some compelling action and landscape shots, because most of that would be down to me and not the camera. I do know that I could react very quickly to a change in focal length or perspective without having to change lenses, that's very important to me, moments are often fleeting then they're gone.

And that's it really, so like you said, lets move on shall we....
Click to expand...
Again, for some reason you don't want him to bring his professional level DSLR, but he already owns a D700. If it's a choice between a D700 and an X-S1, he's be foolish to not choose the D700. There is no reason to continue to go over and over the same points again.

All the best, and happy shooting, Markus Arike
 
DS21 said:
DS21 wrote:
DS21 said:
DS21 said:
DS21 wrote:
DS21 said:
papillon_65 wrote:
DS21 said:
painterdude wrote:

just one more comment re the XS-1 vs the 700. I just went shooting with a friend who owns that Fuji. We shot exactly the same stuff ..only I was using the relative cheap 70-300VR on my DSLR. In close the XS-1 does okay ..but the 70-300 more than matched it ...and completely creamed the XS-1 when wound out to its softest 300mm. This was hand held and shot as the boat was moving away. I cannot post what my friend shot but I can assure you it was way softer than this. If you are on Safari what you need is a sharp lens at full zoom. From what I have seen and I could be wrong, the XS-1 does not perform even as well as a consumer grade zoom on a DSLR. Yes this DSLR is a smokin good one ,..but its huge pixel count pushes lenses to the limit and makes getting sharp shots more challenging. Here's my 300 mm shot for what its worth.






--
http://skylightvistas.weebly.com/index.html
Click to expand...
He may have had an earlier model with the softer lens. My X-S1 would easily match that, no problem whatsoever, in fact it's better at the long end at F5.6 than any consumer telephoto I've used in that range. I suggest you look here, these shots will show you exactly what the X-S1 can do at range. This guy has now changed to a the Nikon D600 and a long telephoto lens but his X-S1 shots, in many cases, look better to my eyes.

--
For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
Click to expand...
The image quality of the boat picture is on a complete different level (much higher), then the X-S1 gallery you linked to. I don't know who are you kidding here. Lovely subjects, yes, but soft in fine detail and drab in color, and displayed in 2 MP size.
Click to expand...
You can view this shot at 100% and it is still nice and sharp and 'clean'. You can't view small sensor shots at 100% and have that same ability, not that I've seen.

--
You don't TAKE a photo, you MAKE a photo.
Click to expand...
You can with the old Fuji's, F10, F11, F30, F31, and even F200, but it is only 6 Mp. But I guess pixel peeping is not looked at favorably in this forum since the X10/X-S1 arrived.
Click to expand...
If someone is only going to view on screen or print small prints then I guess pixel-peeping is 'academic' but if they are going for the best possible image quality, something that will stand up to large printing etc. then they'd best have a look at 100% and see just what it is their image quality really is. There is sure nothing wrong with wanting to see how your images look at 100%.

--
You don't TAKE a photo, you MAKE a photo.
 
marike6 said:
marike6 wrote:
Click to expand...
snip...
marike6 said:
marike6 said:
papillon_65 wrote:
Click to expand...
Again, for some reason you don't want him to bring his professional level DSLR, but he already owns a D700. If it's a choice between a D700 and an X-S1, he's be foolish to not choose the D700. There is no reason to continue to go over and over the same points again.

All the best, and happy shooting, Markus Arike
Click to expand...
At no stage did I say that "I didn't want him to take his D700" so please don't misquote me. I gave him my opinion plain and simple. Oh, and you really need to practice what you preach when it comes to moving on, especially considering you made a point of saying it about two posts ago, so lets just do that, move on. I'm happy to leave it here as long as I'm not misquoted again.
 
Regardless of what camera you've taken those on, they're a lovely set of pics. IQ can be a bit over rated at times, in fact one of my favourite shots was taken on a Fuji 2400z 2mp point and shoot back in 2000 I think. Was published in a photo mag as well. It wouldn't have been a great camera to take on safari though.

Look at some of the greats Juliet Margaret Cameron, Capa, Bresson, Seymour, I wonder what they'd all think of our equipment now?
 
The D700, the D80 and a few other bits are going up for sale on Monday. A new D800 is on the cards and has been approved by the boss/wife. I'll probably use it in DX mode (~15MP) most of the time (with the added increase in frame rate a bonus) which will give me the reach I'll need.

I have a second D700 body (I do the odd wedding/freelance stuff so needed two bodies) which I'll mount the 24-70mm on.

It'll all be insured, unfortunately that won't make it any lighter or less bulky, but I'm listening to my heart here and not my head.

Thanks to all who contributed.

Alan
 
Last edited:
marike6 said:
marike6 wrote:
marike6 said:
LTZ470 wrote:

EM5 Panasonic 100-300 and Oly 12mm f/2...I would have to carry the 75mm f/1.8 as well, just couldn't leave it behind...
Click to expand...
Why would you bring an EM-5 which has extremely poor AF Tracking abilities and a mediocre Panasonic 100-300 zoom that's soft at 300mm? That's makes about as much sense as going out and buying an X-S1 when you already own a far superior camera in the D700.

If you are were shooting static subjects, or taking travel photos that would be one thing, but none of the m43 cameras are any good at AF Tracking. So bringing one in favor of a camera that has awesome PDAF, and better IQ on a once in a lifetime photo trip is a poor idea. If it's reach the OP needs, all he has to do is rent or buy a proper telephoto meant for professional use.

And do you even have any idea what an amazing lens the AF-S Nikon 70-200 2.8 is? This is a professional grade telephoto zoom, the standard lens for ALL photojournalists. It takes all Nikon TCs, and will provide significantly better IQ than a soft, low-contrast consumer Pany 100-300 zoom. AND he already owns it.

If I were going, I'd take the D700 (actually my D800) and possibly a D7000 which will give you a bit more reach due to the crop sensor. All three of these cameras will give you far better IQ than an EM5, much better low-light performance, better DR, and richer, better looking colors.

The EM-5 is not a bad camera. I wouldn't bring it as my only camera on a photo safari.
Click to expand...
EM5 100-300 in action...tracking?...fast AF?...soft?

Do you or have you used the cameras you refer to? or do you just wing it and read about them and then determine from there? Here's a whole series...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/sets/72157630555728944/


http://www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/sets/72157630434697718/


http://www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/sets/72157632788381520/


7558038622_fbf8013ee9_o.jpg


P7121328-X3.jpg


P7121334-X3.jpg


P7121246-X3.jpg


P7121244-X3.jpg


P7121205-X3.jpg





7508015400_9f0f340fd6_o.jpg


7558039328_3085111bc9_o.jpg


--
--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...
 
Last edited:
Midwest said:
Midwest wrote:
Midwest said:
2nd degree wrote:

Yeah. As others have said a complete new camera system wouldn't be feasible. The EM-5 is a beautiful camera though. Love the retro look
Click to expand...
Pretty, but that's all the good that part is.
Click to expand...
Clearly you've never owned and used one.
Midwest said:
Midwest said:
and the IQ is fantastic.
Click to expand...
Your Nikon has fantastic IQ. A micro 4/3 camera is not quite so fantastic. A FF camera has about 3.5 times the surface area of a 4/3 and that is a big difference.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top