Going on safari! Micro 4/3 vs. 1"

Hi everyone, I will be going on a once-in-a-lifetime trip soon to South Africa, Botswana, Victoria Falls area, and Dubai and I'm trying to sort out the photo equipment I'd like to bring.

I've been shooting primarily with a Sony RX100iii, which I plan to bring as a secondary camera, but I am still trying to decide what to bring as my main camera. I've been eyeing the micro 4/3 system for a while (not just for this trip but for my hobby photography), but the release of the RX-10iii has made me consider it as a do it all travel camera.

The Sony RX-10iii would give a nice 24-600mm equivalent range. I will, however, be only at private game reserves and so perhaps I will not really need such a long telephoto range. This, along with the possible need for better dim light capability at dusk/dawn has instead made me consider an Olympus EM5mkii + Oly 40-150 f2.8 + 1.4x TC.

I think that's about the max size/weight I'd like to go, hence APS-C/FF is not really in the equation for me.

Do any of you have any advice with regards to these systems for a trip like this? Would there be a noticeable difference in low light capability/iso performance? Which would you choose? I'm already planning my next trip, which will be to New Zealand... whichever system I go with will be coming along on that trip too!

I will be posting this in both the micro 4/3 forum and Sony Cybershot forum... thanks for any advice you can offer!

I had not taken a truly great photography trip in several years, but just returned home from Yellowstone and have some thoughts.

I always had two bodies ready to go when in the field. I used two E-M1. I think an E-M1 paired with either the E-M5 or E-M5 Mk ii would be great (the former being super cheap these days and very capable for the landscape shots). The few times I did not have both bodies on me, I wish I had. I used a pair of Celestron 9x33 Granite binoculars while my wife used Nikon Prostaff 7s 10X42 for spotting. Both were outstanding but I preferred the smaller size, build and features of the Celestron.

For the sweeping landscapes, I used the Oly 9-18mm. Sometimes with a circular polarizer but often times not due to deleterious effects on the liquid blue skies. My other body had the Oly 40-150 + 1.4x TC or the Oly 70-300 Mk ii affixed. On rare occasion I would remove the TC. This setup leaves a gap between 18-40 mm, but I never felt limited by that gap. I had the Pana 25mm f1.4 prime in my bag, but it was never used.  That said, it was nice to know I had the low light normal lens should need arise.

At times I'd have both tele lenses mounted when strictly shooting wildlife, trying to squeeze the best shot I could get out of each lens. When shooting a grizzly at over 300 yards and an eagle at 150 yards, I truly wish I'd had the Oly 300mm + 1.4x TC or the Pana 100-400mm with me. I'm pretty certain one of those lenses will make it into my bag next time around.

Speaking of bags, I had all my bodies, lenses, chargers, guide books, map, and 15 inch laptop loaded in a Think Tank Airport Accelerator. It is a great bag for air travel and should fit most overhead bins on larger planes.

I can't speak to the Sony since I have never used one, but I think m4/3 is the perfect compromise of size and performance in travel photography.

Have a great trip,

Brian

gx8 and 100-400mm over the oly and 40-150tc they were even throwing in the 12-60mm at some point in the deal

If you're interested in what m43 can do on safari, check our Dallas Dahms safari tour site and his fotozones dot com site . He has shot with m43 stuff a lot on his tours he leads and has written reviews of various m43 lenses used there in South Africa. We're going next year on the Big 5 safaris ourselves and I'll be taking my EM-1 and lenses along (unless the EM-1ii or EM-2 is out by then)

We're leaving tonight for our fifth safari, most with micro four thirds equipment. Each time my wife took a Panasonic bridge camera.

It all depends on your definition of good quality, almost any camera will provide reasonable quality in good light, my wife did well with her FZ200 on our last safari except in difficult light scenarios. She even got our favorite leopard shot with a little Canon point and shoot.

I'm using two EM1's with the 300f4 and MC14, and the Panasonic 35-100, and know I have a big focal length gap the Sony wouldn't have but want to push the quality as far as I can. This is more costly and heavier as well.

I would agree with the poster that said if you like the RX100 quality you'd be happy with the RX10, and it also may not be that important to get evey shot!

My trip is primarily a photo trip having been there before and experienced the beauty and wonder of Africa, and I still plan on taking time off from the cameras to just enjoy nature. Incidentally, consider taking a microlight flight over Vic Falls, it's great!

Have a great time, and fyi I have pics from some of those areas on my website under the travel section.

Why not FZ1000? It has DFD and can do focus tracking. I do not think the RX10III is good at it but may  be I am wrong.

Jmgs2m1 wrote:

Hi everyone, I will be going on a once-in-a-lifetime trip soon to South Africa, Botswana, Victoria Falls area, and Dubai and I'm trying to sort out the photo equipment I'd like to bring.

I've been shooting primarily with a Sony RX100iii, which I plan to bring as a secondary camera, but I am still trying to decide what to bring as my main camera. I've been eyeing the micro 4/3 system for a while (not just for this trip but for my hobby photography), but the release of the RX-10iii has made me consider it as a do it all travel camera.

The Sony RX-10iii would give a nice 24-600mm equivalent range. I will, however, be only at private game reserves and so perhaps I will not really need such a long telephoto range. This, along with the possible need for better dim light capability at dusk/dawn has instead made me consider an Olympus EM5mkii + Oly 40-150 f2.8 + 1.4x TC.

I think that's about the max size/weight I'd like to go, hence APS-C/FF is not really in the equation for me.

Do any of you have any advice with regards to these systems for a trip like this? Would there be a noticeable difference in low light capability/iso performance? Which would you choose? I'm already planning my next trip, which will be to New Zealand... whichever system I go with will be coming along on that trip too!

I will be posting this in both the micro 4/3 forum and Sony Cybershot forum... thanks for any advice you can offer!

I've done a fair bit of travel in South Africa, Botswana, Victoria Falls, etc, and I'm from New Zealand.

To be honest with you, even though I'm a Micro Four Thirds user, I would go with the Sony RX10 III.

The Olympus setup with the 40-150 would be okay for wildlife, but I found myself needing to get out to 600mm (equivalent) a lot when shooting safari. Private reserves will be no different.

So if you go with the Olympus, you'll also need a short zoom and ideally something longer than the 40-150 as well.

When travelling, it really helps to go simple and light. The Sony is trumps there.

Also, the low light capabilities of the Sony aren't far behind the Olympus despite the smaller sensor size. Don't forget that you'll lose a stop of light with the 1.4x teleconverter, making the Olympus zoom f/4, and the Sony is also f/4 at the long end.

Have fun!

S

If you are interested in coming back with some great shots, you need reach and as low light capability that the budget will allow. For normal shooting go for what a comfortable setup.

Fz1000 on safari

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56829012