M43 lens to take to A. African safari

[mtschnur]

I am going to S. Africa in May and will be in Kruger Nat'l Park for three days on a photo safari. I have a Panasonic GX7, and will take these lenses: Pana 7-14mm wide zoom, 14-140mm zoom, 25mm f/1.7 prime, and 100-300 telephoto.

Question: would the Pana G X Vario 35-100mm be a worthwhile upgrade? Money is not a big object. Would the tradeoff of the extra reach from the 14-140mm vs. the better IQ of the 35-100mm be worth it?

I am also considering purchasing a GX8 body so I can have two cameras, one with a zoom and one with a wide angle lens. The GX8 sealed body seems like it would be a good idea.

Thoughts?

 

[Bengeo]

The new Pana 100-400mm would be an obvious choice if available by then. Otherwise look at the new Olympus 300mm f4 plus 1.4x converter. Definitely take 2 or more bodies to avoid lens changes.

 

[Mk82]

7-14 & 100-300 lenses are valuable.

 

[timmer350]

Yea - go for very wide (7-14), and very long. Wait for the 100-400 if possible. Consider a macro too.

Tim

 

[LMNCT]

The 35-100 is an excellent lens, but probably not long enough for an African Safari. The GX8 is an very good idea. I have one and it is my first choice (also own GX7 and GH4) most of the time. It balances well with long lenses as well as wide and normal ones. The only Panasonic long lens available now is the 100-300. If the rumors are correct, the new 100-400 will be available in March and that is the long lens that I would take along. If you want to be "ready for bear..or cats or whatever" you might consider taking the GX7 as a backup camera and set it up with a shorter long lens. Remember to take plenty of batteries and your charger/s. Have a great time.

 

[Day Hiker]

I am going to S. Africa in May and will be in Kruger Nat'l Park for three days on a photo safari. I have a Panasonic GX7, and will take these lenses: Pana 7-14mm wide zoom, 14-140mm zoom, 25mm f/1.7 prime, and 100-300 telephoto.

Question: would the Pana G X Vario 35-100mm be a worthwhile upgrade? Money is not a big object. Would the tradeoff of the extra reach from the 14-140mm vs. the better IQ of the 35-100mm be worth it?

I am also considering purchasing a GX8 body so I can have two cameras, one with a zoom and one with a wide angle lens. The GX8 sealed body seems like it would be a good idea.

I went on safari with a 70-200mm f/2.8 on a 35m FF camera. I took a 2x teleconverter for a 140-400mm f/5.6 when I needed it. I ended up not using the teleconverter all that much because f/5.6 was a slow lens when the animals are most active: morning and evening. I ended up with marvelous photos of animals in their surroundings; 200mm was a fine focal length for me.

If you are wanting to capture eyeballs and head and shoulder animal portraits, then the 35-100mm (200mm equiv) is not your lens.

If I were to return with m4/3 gear, it would be the M.Zuiko 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO accompanied by the MC-14 for a 210mm f/4 when needed. Since money is not an object, I believe this to be a superior safari lens combo to the 35-100mm f/2.8. The extra two stops of light coming in at 140mm compared to your superzoom is a godsend in the bush. For personal use, I'll almost always take speed over reach in a lens. For that reason, the new Leica 100-400mm does not interest me that much. 400mm f/6.3? No thank you.

Enjoy your safari!


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

 

[C Sean]

I am going to S. Africa in May and will be in Kruger Nat'l Park for three days on a photo safari. I have a Panasonic GX7, and will take these lenses: Pana 7-14mm wide zoom, 14-140mm zoom, 25mm f/1.7 prime, and 100-300 telephoto.

In 2009 I went to Kruger Park but I stayed in a private Game Reserve called Thanda Nani Lodge. On two occasions we went into Kruger Park through the Malelane Gate and basically saw South West of the Park. At the time I had a super zoom point and shoot.

In 2015 I went to Botswana and stayed in the Delta region. I took with me Gh4 + 35-100mm 2.8, gh3 + 100-300 and GM1 + 12-35

Question: would the Pana G X Vario 35-100mm be a worthwhile upgrade? Money is not a big object. Would the tradeoff of the extra reach from the 14-140mm vs. the better IQ of the 35-100mm be worth it?

When it comes to safari photography normally one camera has the long telephoto lens and the other camera body has the 70-200mm 2.8. The big cats are most active in low light but in the daytime especially Kruger Park they draw a big crowd.

The 35-100mm 2.8 is a very good lens but if money isn't an option you could consider renting the 40-150mm 2.8 for the time being and equip it to the GX7? Afterall you said money isn't a big object and the 35-100 can be purchase later down the road.

I am also considering purchasing a GX8 body so I can have two cameras, one with a zoom and one with a wide angle lens. The GX8 sealed body seems like it would be a good idea.

While a wide angle can be used when the animals get close and idea for shooting herds of elephants but most of the time it will be spent on landscape. These landscapes will include animals in them but remember if you're in a safari vehicle you will be sharing it with other people.

Thoughts?

DO NOT take the 100-300, instead rent out the 100-400 and equip it to the GX8.

--
Mark

 

[BuckarooBanzai]

I am going to S. Africa in May and will be in Kruger Nat'l Park for three days on a photo safari. I have a Panasonic GX7, and will take these lenses: Pana 7-14mm wide zoom, 14-140mm zoom, 25mm f/1.7 prime, and 100-300 telephoto.

Question: would the Pana G X Vario 35-100mm be a worthwhile upgrade? Money is not a big object. Would the tradeoff of the extra reach from the 14-140mm vs. the better IQ of the 35-100mm be worth it?

I am also considering purchasing a GX8 body so I can have two cameras, one with a zoom and one with a wide angle lens. The GX8 sealed body seems like it would be a good idea.

Thoughts?

--
Mark

If money is no object I would get the Olympus 300mm f/4 that is coming out in March ; ). Add a Olympus EM-5 II and battery grip and you have 6 stops of IS with that lens/camera combo. Or rent that combo.

When I went on safari I never used the focal length equivalent to the 7-14. I did in Cape Town but not on safari. You'll probably be going on rides very early in the morning and late afternoon/dusk so IBIS will be your friend along with fast glass. (My safari was in 2008 and I had a Nikon D300, 70-200mm VR with 1.7 teleconverter. We were in a private reserve next to Kruger so could get VERY close to the animals. Would rather have had m43 gear then for the travel weight savings).

An alternative would be a bridge camera like the Panny FZ1000 (good reach) or Sony RX10 II (weather-sealing on that a plus) to supplement your current system





. You be able to shoot video as well.

Enjoy the trip. A few shots from mine 8 years ago with the D300/70-200 2.8.




Leopard cub just after sunrise.




Secretary bird very late afternoon




Wild Dog - This was after sunset.




Sunset on Zambezi River

 

[mtschnur]

Excellent photos! Thanks Buckaroo!!

 

[BuckarooBanzai]

Excellent photos! Thanks Buckaroo!!

 

[C Sean]

7-14 & 100-300 lenses are valuable.

Well 7-14 is going to be difficult to use if you're happen to be on the wrong side of the vehicle. Also I took the 100-300 with me to Botswana and the experience I had was so bad it resorted me spending a big chunk of my money on the 100-400. It was so bad I planned to get the Olympus 300 when it came out only for it be delayed and Panasonic annouced their alternative lens. It was so bad I took more shots with the 35-100 than the 100-300. It was so bad a woman forgot her camera recharger so I lent her the Gh4 + 35-100 for the day. Did I mention I took more photos with 35-100 than the 100-300 and I spent one day shooting with 100-300?

The 100-300 may of been a goodish lens back in the G3/GH2 days. Those days are gone and we now surrounded by better MFT gear. The MFT format has matured a lot not because of it lens selection but the techology in the cameras aswell. The 100-300 is a cheap telephoto zoom and these cheap telephotos zooms are being phrased out with improved MKII.

Oh by the way it was so bad I canceled my bear trip in 2015.

 

[C Sean]

I am going to S. Africa in May and will be in Kruger Nat'l Park for three days on a photo safari. I have a Panasonic GX7, and will take these lenses: Pana 7-14mm wide zoom, 14-140mm zoom, 25mm f/1.7 prime, and 100-300 telephoto.

Question: would the Pana G X Vario 35-100mm be a worthwhile upgrade? Money is not a big object. Would the tradeoff of the extra reach from the 14-140mm vs. the better IQ of the 35-100mm be worth it?

I am also considering purchasing a GX8 body so I can have two cameras, one with a zoom and one with a wide angle lens. The GX8 sealed body seems like it would be a good idea.

Thoughts?

--
Mark

If money is no object I would get the Olympus 300mm f/4 that is coming out in March ; ). Add a Olympus EM-5 II and battery grip and you have 6 stops of IS with that lens/camera combo. Or rent that combo.

When I went on safari I never used the focal length equivalent to the 7-14. I did in Cape Town but not on safari. You'll probably be going on rides very early in the morning and late afternoon/dusk so IBIS will be your friend along with fast glass. (My safari was in 2008 and I had a Nikon D300, 70-200mm VR with 1.7 teleconverter. We were in a private reserve next to Kruger so could get VERY close to the animals. Would rather have had m43 gear then for the travel weight savings).

An alternative would be a bridge camera like the Panny FZ1000 (good reach) or Sony RX10 II (weather-sealing on that a plus) to supplement your current system

. You be able to shoot video as well.

Enjoy the trip. A few shots from mine 8 years ago with the D300/70-200 2.8.


Leopard cub just after sunrise.


Secretary bird very late afternoon


Wild Dog - This was after sunset.


Sunset on Zambezi River

Excellent shots!

Regarding the 7-14. In the Kruger Park you're not allowed to step outside the vehicle unless you're in a 'safe zone'. These safe zones include camps and rest areas where you're allowed to walk around freely but aren't permitted to interact with any large mammals wondering close by. These areas are great for close up shots of birds and they even sit next to you on the dinner table.

Botswana is different because there is a lack of facilities in their national parks and therefor you're allowed to get outside the vehicle if it's safe. I had with me the 12-35 2.8 and if it was safe to do so I asked the driver if I could get out of the vehicle. I then stick close to the vehicle, get my landscape shot and jump back into the vehicle. There were times I wished I could of gone wider but there were times when in the vehicle the 12-35 allowed me to get the shot the 7-14 couldn't. So what I'm saying when it comes to Botswana it's 50/50 to take the 12-35/12-40 or a wide zoom. For Kruger Park game drives the 12-35/12-40 in my opinion is the safer option.

In my Botswana trip most people only took one DSLR with them and used a telephoto lens. Some of them had a wide lens with them but didn't have additional body to use it on. Therefor they rarely used the lens.