Camera for safari

Laurassafari said:

I noticed no one recommended the canon with the larger zoom. If I go that route (mirrorless camera body and larger zoom lens) is there a different one I should look at like a Nikon? I’m willing to stretch the budget a little. This is such a big decision for me. I want to have a good camera for this safari but I also hope to want to use it on future hikes and trips too.

Click to expand...

It's the evening photo trips that are difficult and expensive to accommodate. Any of the cameras will be OK for the daytime.

Here's a website where you can compare the sizes of different cameras.

Laura,

Welcome to the fora. Others have given you good advice and insights, including with regards to the cameras you mentioned. So I will offer a couple of different suggestions.

The first one is, assuming you are unlikely to another safari soon after this one (apologies if I am completely wrong), do not skimp on the camera. It's an expensive trip and you want the best photos you can. This does not mean you have to empty your wallet.

In Kruger you want to be able to reach at least 400mm on the long end.

My suggestions:

• Nikon Z50 with the kit lenses, which gives you 24-375 mm equivalent. It costs about USD 1,150. The Z50 is very light and smaller than the Lumix FZ300 (https://www.apotelyt.com/compare-camera/panasonic-fz300-vs-nikon-z50)
  • You could rent the Nikon 400mm for longer reach if you were to need it.
• Rent/buy the Sony RX100 and rent/buy Nikon's Z50, Z7ii, Zf
  • No lens changing, which means you do not miss photos and do not run the risk of dust in the camera sensor
  • The Sony gives you 24-200mm equivalent, so you can have overlaps in focal length with the Nikon kit
  • If you buy the Sony, then rent the Z7ii with either the Nikkor 100-400mm or the Tamron 150-500mm. The Z7ii gives you latitude for cropping if somehow you were to need it.
    • You could also rent the Z50 with either of those lenses for reach.
    • You could rent the Zf for top notch AF in a light package with the 100-400mm
  • If you rent the Sony, buy the Z50 in whatever configuration you think you'd be using later, leave the kit lenses at home and rent the Nikon 100-400mm lens.

If you do not mind deferring your long-term hiking camera decision and do not mind a bit more weight for the safari (check with your tour organizer on weight/volume allowances), then there are options galore by renting. I will just mention three:

• 2 Nikon Zfs, one with a Tamron 24-70 and the other with the 100-400mm. But one Zf with both lenses would do great (except for the caveat about changing lenses). Either way it would be light.
• Rent a Nikon Z8 or Zf with the Nikon 28-400mm if it is available as a rental by the time you travel. The Z8 is heavier and bigger, but you could crop if you were to somehow need it.
• Rent a Nikon Z50 with Nikon 28-400mm. Lots of reach. Your phone would take care of things that are close to you.
• Rent an APSC camera Sony or Fuji with appropriate lenses.

If you do opt to rent, I would further suggest you get rent for an additional week prior to your trip so you can familiarize/set up the equipment.

Laura,

Should you decide on a Nikon (the Z50 someone mentioned would be great) and are in the states, Nikon is having a 24mos no interest offer, ends tomorrow (the 24th). I have the Z5 & love it!

Marie

"Nikon Z50 with the kit lenses, which gives you 24-375 mm equivalent. It costs about USD 1,150. The Z50 is very light and smaller than the Lumix FZ300 (https://www.apotelyt.com/compare-camera/panasonic-fz300-vs-nikon-z50)"



Not all that sure that it is a fair comparison there....

I'm willing to bet $1000 that ,used like that, the Pana will take better photos.

(This is a personal view)

A safari, especially a first safari, is about capturing memories, not creating great art.

Of course, we all want the best images we can get, but even imperfect images of memorable moments are better than missed images.

So, whatever camera you decide to go for, get it well in advance and practice, practice, practice so that it becomes second nature to you.

A final warning - safaris can be addictive

I don't claim to be an expert, so take this however you want. But I believe renting complete kits (body/lens) or the Sony with lens for a trip like this is a mistake. It would take me at least a month or so to feel comfortable with any camera different from the ones I currently own and use. So I would have to rent for at least a month besides the length of the whole safari. And in real life I don't think I have felt fully comfortable and at ease with depending wholly on any new camera I ever purchased for at least two months. I most assuredly could not handle getting lined out with a different camera in 1 week which would also probably be full simply with other preparations for the trip.

davidedric said:

(This is a personal view)

A safari, especially a first safari, is about capturing memories, not creating great art.

Of course, we all want the best images we can get, but even imperfect images of memorable moments are better than missed images.

So, whatever camera you decide to go for, get it well in advance and practice, practice, practice so that it becomes second nature to you.

A final warning - safaris can be addictive

Click to expand...

Yes - what they said - but better than I did above. Make sure you can operate your gear perfectly in any and all conditions - in the dark, while bouncing in a Jeep, bad weather, etc.

Bob A L said:

I don't claim to be an expert, so take this however you want. But I believe renting complete kits (body/lens) or the Sony with lens for a trip like this is a mistake. It would take me at least a month or so to feel comfortable with any camera different from the ones I currently own and use. So I would have to rent for at least a month besides the length of the whole safari. And in real life I don't think I have felt fully comfortable and at ease with depending wholly on any new camera I ever purchased for at least two months. I most assuredly could not handle getting lined out with a different camera in 1 week which would also probably be full simply with other preparations for the trip.

Click to expand...

Hi Bob,

My apologies if my post seems that a hobbyist is purporting to be an expert. Having said that, it seems to me that I can share some ideas based on my experience and that of others that have gone on safari with me.

Without knowing the OPs photographic experience, comfort with gadgets, willingness and time to deal with new gear, I was simply trying to highlight that there is every imaginable permutations under the sky, particularly if you rent.

Whenever a close friend asks me for similar kid of advise there is obviously a much more involved conversation. If they are willing and ready to buy and especially if they are absolutely clear about future use of their gear, one type of advise is given (which includes going to a physical store and getting a feel for the gear).

If they are not sure about future use but are willing to rent, I usually advise a at least a week additional rental time. If they seem to be inclined to want to use complex gear then I suggest a longer advance rental period and getting informed on what settings wildlife and safari users tend to use.

As an example, a few months ago a friend was headed for a safari. He was trying to decide between renting a Sony A1 or a Nikon Z9 and a big assortment of lenses based on something he saw on YouTube. Since he had been happily using a Nikon D5600 for a number of years and was looking to upgrade, I suggested he kept things simple. So he bought two Z50s, one new and one used. Took both, one with the Nikon 24-120 and the other with the 100-400mm, anything too close for 24-120mm he could shoot with his phone. He was one very happy traveler.

I have nothing against renting for something like a safari, but just feel like more than a week is needed to get familiar with any new equipment in a manner that one could feel confident about using it on important photos.

Laurassafari said:

Hi everyone, I will be going on an African safari (Krugar) and am stressing about what camera to buy. Budget is up to $1000 and I’d like it to be as lightweight and portable as possible so that I don’t mind carrying it on future vacations and hikes. I am considering the Lumix DMC fz- 300 and I’ve also looked at the canon R50 or R100 (bundle comes with a 55-210 lens - but not sure that’s enough zoom for a safari? Open to any camera/lens combo that you all think is best. Any suggestions and/or advice would be greatly appreciated

Click to expand...

My 2 cents.

KISS - keep it simple stupid. Most ILC require you to take the time to familiarize the camera to get the most out of it. If you are starting from or close to zero, point and shoot might be a better option.

The FZ1000II is better than the FZ300 with bigger sensor and more pixel count. It should have better image quality, but shorter focal length (400 vs 600 FFE) though. 600mm is better, but 400 might be long enough. The best is the RX10IV, but it's way over your budget.

If the long focal length is just for the one off safari trip, the ZS100 (250mm FFE) might be quite a bit short, but it would be compact enough for anything that does not require such long focal length. The FZxxx are big and heavy compare to the ZS100. The best is RX100VI/VII (200mm FFE), but it's over your budget. Most of people view images on a small screen (phone), and even with just 200mm, one can crop to close-up and the images still look good.

I'll probably get told off by fanboys but I wouldn't recommend the fz330/300 for a safari.

I just don't find mine very sharp. It's a 25-600 equivalent so you wouldn't expect it to be.

It isn't really bad but side by side with a dedicated lens and it's obvious. Mine isn't even as sharp as the Olympus plastic fantastic and that's a £99 lens.

On a sunny day and with some pp it can produce but for a once or twice in a lifetime Safari, not for me. I recently took mine on holiday and got some great photos but it was very bright and sunny the whole week

F2.8 sounds great on paper but imo the camera gives quite poor results in lower light and you can't really push the iso very far. So really 6.3, 7.1 on an apsc camera isn't really that bad because you can use 4 figure iso's where as you'll probably not want to go over 400 with the smaller sensor in poor light.

My GX9 and 14-140 combo produces far superior images and I can probably just about crop to 600mm fov and you'd be hard pushed to tell the photo from one taken with the fz330 at 600mm.

I'd go with the fz2000 myself. The 480mm lens and bigger sensor will get you great photos and won't struggle quite so badly if it's cloudy or going dark.

I'd say the canon or Nikon apsc route with a 300mm or so reach would do you ok with some cropping. Apparently you don't always need as much reach as you'd think on Safari's.

I do like the fz330. I don't want to be too harsh on it but I think there are better options.

I'm seeing "open box" FZ1000 MkII on eBay for $725. I got mine (refurbished) for $550 two years ago, and it's much nicer to use than my previous MkI, thanks to the front dial, larger EVF and touchscreen. It's not sealed against dust and moisture, whereas the FZ300 is.

There are plenty of cameras that are better than the FZ300 for a safari but not at that price point , size and weight .

The Pana FZ 2000/2500 is a good suggestion but at twice the price.

This guy did OK with the FZ300 :

Absolutely great and real down to earth results shown.

I've had some good photo's from mine but for me it just falls short when it comes to its sharpness.

You just aren't going to get high quality glass on a £400 bridge camera. Not with a lens that has such a range. I'd rather have a lens with more quality even if it's a bit shorter because not every shot is going to be at 600mm. I'd expect there's a lot of heat haze so you'll get your better photo's at close range.

It's good enough for a lot of people. The size and price and weather sealing make it a nice camera.But it's not great on a cloudy day even with a 2.8 aperture.

When you see good photo's they will have been in very good light or with a lot of pp and usually at a smaller size.

I'm not really that impressed by that guys safari pics if I'm honest. Even on my phone they look a bit soft and mushy.

I still use mine but I think it's slightly overhyped and these days a m43 or apsc with a shorter zoom lens will give you better results. Ok at a higher price. But if you have a $1000+ budget for a safari camera I'd be inclined to spend it

If I had a $1,000 budget for a safari camera, I would probably buy two FZ300's so I had a backup. I personally believe whatever you take on a safari absolutely needs to include a back up camera. And if I took my newest and latest camera on safari, I would insist on taking my FZ300 being the back up.

Thanks so much