Which would you buy?

My son is going with me to Tanzania in March. He owns a Canon 10D. Which of the two following lenses would you buy? Will the 70-200mm with an extender equal the 100-400mm? That is, at 400mm. (For what it is worth, I recommended the f/2.8 and a 1.4 High Grade Tamron Extender.)

100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS
70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM

Your opinions and feedback are greatly appreciated, thanks,

Bill

What will you be shooting for in Tanzania?

BrianS wrote:What will you be shooting for in Tanzania?

We will be in a vehicle most of the time touring three national parks. I have heard all kinds of feedback from others. Comments like, you won't need a tripod (ha!), a 300mm is all you will need (I doubt that). Having not been there, I am taking all my equipment with me, including a Nikon 400mm f/3.5 and extenders. But my son is limited right now. He has a consumer grade 300mm. Of course, the real question is, how will he use the lens after he gets back. The 400mm lens he is considering is a f/4 lens but is more reasonably priced. The 200mm is a fantastic lens. But we would like feedback from those with experience using the 400mm. Thanks for the reply. Bill

Bill-

I don't recommend the 70-200mm + 2x combo. The images are just too soft. The 100-400L on a 10D is a nice combo, yielding 640mm effectively. My first time to Tanzania, I took the 100-400L lens, and came back with some great shots.

However, if he already has the 70-200mm lens, I would suggest a 300mm prime lens. Pickup a used 300mmL f/4 IS for under a grand, add a 1.4xII teleconverter, and that is a nice setup. I actually use it often. Much better than the 100-400L, too.

As far as a 300mm lens not being long enough, it depends on what his 'vision' is. Some people go for the head and shoulders portraits of the wildlife, and others go for the 'animal in the environment' shots. I fall into the latter, and I do just fine with a 300mm f/2.8 IS lens, and use both the 1.4x and 2.x teleconverters. The formula completely changes if you are shooting with a full frame 35mm camera.

I suspect you will be visiting either Lake Manyara or Tarangire, and then Ngorongoro and Serengeti. If you are traveling to Lake Manyara, long lenses aren't necessary there, as it is a ground water forest, and shorter, faster lenses are more preferred, but not required.

Tarangire National Park has a great number of elephants, and shorter lenses can be used there. However, Tarangire is rich with bird life. I find that a 10D + 300mm f/2.8 + 1.4x just isn't enough if you want to do avian photography there. Just my $.02

Ngorongoro and Serengeti are filled with mammals, and it is more up to you how you want to portray them. Refer to my 'vision' statement above. I think a 300mm f/4 IS + 1.4xII would be a great combo, in my opinion.

WOW, thanks Andy! You are correct in the areas we will be visiting an your detailed notes are very helpful. I will pass you comments along to my son. I really appreciate your taking the time to give some dern good advice. Best regards, Bill

I am going to suggest the 100-400L because of its versatility in a myriad of shooting experiences, many of which will be unanticipated.

The 70-200 f/2.8L is no slouch, by the way, but it would be slower and less resolute than the 100-400, especially if you use the 2x. It is a great lens, though.

I can't recommend the 300 f/4L IS and 1.4x as Andy has. Reason is that while it's a great combination it does not have much of what you wanted: FLEXABILITY.

Dick Ginkowski wrote:I am going to suggest the 100-400L because of its versatility in a myriad of shooting experiences, many of which will be unanticipated.

The 70-200 f/2.8L is no slouch, by the way, but it would be slower and less resolute than the 100-400, especially if you use the 2x. It is a great lens, though.

I can't recommend the 300 f/4L IS and 1.4x as Andy has. Reason is that while it's a great combination it does not have much of what you wanted: FLEXABILITY.

I disagree about flexability. If he already has the 70-200mm lens, then he is covered very well.

70-200mm
280mm
300mm
420mm

Pretty darned nice set of focal lengths, and much better quality than the 100-400L. If he wants to travel lightly, definitely go with a 100-400L solution. If you are traveling in March, it will be the rainy season over there, and dust won't be that much of an issue, so switching lenses shouldn't be a dust problem.

Just two different opionions, tackling the same problem. I was over in Tanzania a few months ago, and I took along a very very lightweight outfit for that trip. I had a 70-200mmL f/4, 300mmL f/4 IS, and 16-35mmL f/2.8. I also had the 1.4xII teleconverter. Pretty darned nice optical quality, considering the investment and weight. Perhaps I have had a not so great 100-400L in the past, but at 400mm and f/5.6, my images were too soft for my taste.

Just $.02!

(don't you just love this forum, where you can get opinions all day long?)

I own all of the lenses in question. While the 70-200 is a good lens on its own, it is a very mediocre lens at best, borderline poor lens with the best Canbon teleconverters and probably worse with a Tamron converter although I haven't used that converter. If he really needs focal lenghts above 200mm, the 100-400 will give him superior performance. In the less than 200mm range, in most circumstances the 70-200 will give slightly better performance.

Bill -- Given the way you phrased your question (should I buy a 70-200+2X or a 100-400 for use on a 10D in Africa), I think it's a no brainer to get the 100-400. With the high ISO performance of the 10D, the larger aperture of the 70-200 is not as critical as it used to be. Although there are plenty of great shots to be had in Africa at all focal lengths, the majority of your photos will be taken with your longest lens (when I was prepping for my Africa trip, I looked at Art Wolfe's Africa book and counted that he took about 80% of the shots in it with a 500 or 600). Since the 100-400 is the superior choice optically at the long end, as others have mentioned, it should be the choice. You also get the dust benefit of not having to change lenses on the 10D, although the 100-400 itself will pick up more internal dust due to the push-pull design.

Andy & E.J. have pretty much covered the waterfront, but to add $.02 more ...

First time over there, I had the 300 f2.8, the 300 f4 and the 100-400. My son, daughter and I were trading lenses - well, initially we were trading lenses until I said I'm using the 100-400 period! If I could bring but one lens it would be the 100-400 without question. I'll be heading back this summer with my son and taking both the 70-200 and the 100-400 (and a 500) and if the past is any guide, he will get to use the 70-200. Andy's correct though that it really depends on your style of shooting but even in the Serengeti or the Crater, you'll likely have more times where you're wishing for more length than less. At least that seems to be my experience. (I keep wondering whether to pick up Sigma's 300-800 monster.)

Two more thoughts. First, flexibility is not to be understated there. Not changing lenses is wonderful because it means not getting dust on the sensor. March is a relatively dustless time, but I think I spent about an hour a day cleaning lenses, filters, etc. And second, depending on your travel arrangements, a tripod really may not be necessary. Our family group has always had a vehicle to ourselves. So when I say hold still, no one breathes until the shutter clicks. During the day, shooting is generally from the Land Rover and a beanbag - and cooperative travel mates - is all you need. While I've brought a tripod each time, the only time I've used it is for pre-sunrise or post-sunset shots or for panorama to be stitched. And for at least the former, a cable release is likely more important than a tripod - not to mention much easier to pack.

Rich

I guess it helps to go back and read the original post! Given the two choices you indicated, I would go with the 100-400L. Versatile as heck, and easy to pack.

voila!

I agree with Rich regarding not taking a tripod. I just cannot find the justification for the few shots that I can take with one. Keep in mind, you will be spending most of your photography time in your Land Rover. Yes, there are a few times where you can get out and photograph with a tripod, but not very often. I have often thought of bringing a Gitzo 1127 or 1128, combined with a lightweigh ball head, just to be prepared for whatever comes along. Of course, this ties into the same dream where I also bring along my Canham 4x5 large format gear. Not too many environmental wildlife shots in large format!

Note that the 70-200 f/2.8 with a 2x is a 140-400 f/5.6 where the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 is actually a faster lens when shooting at less than about 300mm and the image quality is far superior.

I also own all the lenses in question and having been to Africa twice I would choose the 100-400 hands down if I was only taking one of those lenses. In fact, on my first trip I had a Tamron 200-500 on a film camera which is just a bit shorter than the 100-400 on the 10D and that worked great. i changed lenses infrequentlyand was better prepared for quick changes in action. I shoot my 100-400 @ 5.6 at least 50% of the time on my film camera and I get very sharp, publishable images using it. I would agree on the 'you dont 'need' a tripod discussion, especially with those lenses on a digital body where you can increase the ISO for more shutter speed.

I agree on the 100-400. I would not use a converter on the 70-200 unless it was an emergency and even then I would limit it to the 1.4x stopped down at least a stop. The 2x and the 70-200 is a terribly soft combination....

When I was in Africa I had a 300/2.8 with converters and a 100-400. I found the 100-400 to be the most useful.

Many thanks to each of you for the advice on which lens to buy. Ask and you shall receive! I continue to be amazed at the level of knowledge and the willingness to share by others that I have found at NSN since I started posting here. This is a REAL community of nice people who share an genuine interest in photography.

My son and I look foward to the trip and many of your comments will certainly have impact on how we prepare.

He will be using Canon, I will be using Nikon. Ought to be great to compare the results after the trip.

We have been presented with several planning problems. Perhaps the most serious is our limit on luggage weight when we arrive. It may not exceed 33 pounds! This is because we will be flying in light aircraft from one camp to another while there. I packed a camera bag with what I wanted to take and arrived at 23 pounds WITHOUT a tripod! So, we have some serious considerations to make.

The second issue is how to bring back about 10,000 digital shots. I am leaning toward the FlashTrax 80Gbyte Model. Of all the choices this appears to me to be the best.

Thanks again for the great advice.

Best regards and hoping you will find good light.

Bill

Bill-

you are totally correct about this being a real community. Ask and ye shall receive!

Are you flying between each park, or are you just flying from the Serengeti back to Arusha? I ask this, because the weight limit seems inflexible, but once you know the rules, you know how to bend them. Feel free to email me offline regarding this one, since it is off topic.

andy@andybiggs.com

Bill Lockhart wrote:We have been presented with several planning problems. Perhaps the most serious is our limit on luggage weight when we arrive. It may not exceed 33 pounds! This is because we will be flying in light aircraft from one camp to another while there. I packed a camera bag with what I wanted to take and arrived at 23 pounds WITHOUT a tripod! So, we have some serious considerations to make.

While I haven't been to Africa I know many that have and invariably I have been told that the 33lb limit, which seems to be the norm for these tours, was not enforced. While in general I don't believe in going over the weight limit due to safety considerations in aircraft, a few extra pounds (single digits) is insignificant.

Bill Lockhart wrote:We have been presented with several planning problems. Perhaps the most serious is our limit on luggage weight when we arrive. It may not exceed 33 pounds! This is because we will be flying in light aircraft from one camp to another while there.

It may be worth trying to find out about that flight. Is it scheduled or charter. How many people on board. This will help you decide if you can safely go over the limit.

Our Botswana trip this year involved a charter from Maun to the camp. Carol and I, pilot and one camp member were the only ones on-board, both directions. Just as well, I was carrying a Photo-Trekker with EOS3, 28-70 2.8 and a 500F4L IS. Carol had a mini-trekker with an EOS30, 2x100-300 F4's and converters. And a carrier bag with about 150 rolls of film. And we had some clothes too.

My experience would suggest that the light aircraft limit is not strictly enforced, although if it's blatantly over weight, they may have something to say.

since others have responded on the weight issue, I will weigh in.

In my experience, it is a pretty easy situation. We only take flights from the Serengeti back to Arusha, as opposed to and from every park on the trip. So, my experience is limited to those flights.

A few days before we take the charter back to Arusha, our head guide asks each one of us if we think we are grossly over weight. I usually am, and he just reserves 2 seats, instead of 1 for me. However, they are figuring on an average weight per person to be about 250 pounds. That includes your physical body, 1 bag for clothes, and another for camera equipment.

So, if I go over my weight by, say, 50 pounds, that means another 4 people can go over the same amount, and thus only having to purchase 1 extra seat, which is about US$75. The key here is planning ahead, and letting the charter company know ahead of time.

As usual, Andy's response is right on the money. Frankly, I wouldn't want to be flying from camp to camp since (1) it'll add expense and (2) you won't have the same guide if you do it that way and having the same guide for the entire trip is a real positive IMO. I've flown directly from the Serengeti to Arusha as well as taking the "scenic route" through Manyara. My camera stuff has weighed in at over 33 pounds (although I still come in under 250 total). We did have one time where it looked like there might be an issue. The easy way around it? Wear a photo vest and pack it with as much stuff as you can. It didn't make for a very comfortable flight wearing it but there was no hassle whatsoever.

Rich