Safari Decision... leave the Oly 40-150 Pro behind?

Amb72 wrote:

James Pilcher wrote:

Chizuka wrote:

Hello. I will be going on a safari in Tanzania. I was planning to take the PL 100-400 mounted on the Lumix G9, the Olympus 40-150 Pro mounted on the Olympus EM10 mk2 and the Olympus 12-40 Pro in my bag, or mounted on the EM10, with the 40-150 in the bag.

For space and weight reasons, I am wondering if I could afford to leave the Oly 40-150 Pro behind?

What are your thoughts?

The PanaLeica 100-400mm f/4-6.3 lens is sloooow...

The Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO is faaaast...

A faster lens opens up opportunities on early and late game drives. That 2+ stops of speed at the “long” end will be a Godsend. Take the Olympus. Include the 1.4TC (if you can) for that little extra reach when you can afford to lose a stop of light.

If you want to photograph the eye of an elephant in good light, take the PanaLeica 100-400mm. If you want to have good reach and a longer shooting day, take the Olympus. I took a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 along with a 2x TC and felt I wanted for nothing. I had 400mm reach when I needed it and speed the rest of the time. If you “need” to reach out to 800mm equiv, there isn’t much else I can say.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Life is good in the woods

This is not true in Tanzania. A lot of the wildlife spotting, especially rhinos, cheetahs and leopards is from distance. You will absolutely need the range of the 100-400. And tbh, the speed of the lens never became a factor...except for some shots of a leopard up in a tree where it was hard to get good pictures because it was in the shade. And even that was from 300-400 on the Panasonic, so the 40-150 with TC wouldn't have helped.

The plains in Serengetti were huge. You will definitely want to pack the longest lens you have. Focal length was more important than speed based on my experience.

Thanks for your insight Amb72.

My experience is in Zambia and Botswana, with a small bit in Zimbabwe. I found speed more versatile than reach, but I was happy with images of animals in their environment rather than closeups. Even then, I got my share of closeups.

It's good that the OP have many opinions and experiences from which to draw here.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Life is good in the woods