What is the best lens prime or zoom for wildlife and bird photography for an FX body Nikon?

ChasCS

I am going to google "Safari Safety" and "Safari Accidents".

There are several suggestion to play safe on Safari at Arrive Alive For your info...

Golf007sd

@adamz: +1

Two bodies is a must. For me 2.8 only. Dx with a 24-70 2.8, D4 /w 300 2.8 1.7 Tele. The ability to hand hold is very key as well. Monopod is a must as well. Turn VR of and fire away.

Godless

AF-S 300mm f/2.8 would be my weapon of choice. Relatively lightweight, sharp as hell, works with TC:s.

Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 S is an excellent lens as well. I had the previous OS version, and it was quite nice.

The other lenses I would pack for a safari would be AF-S 24mm f/1.4G and 85mm f/1.8G, which are the basic trip kit for me anyway.

proudgeek

In essence, you're really talking about two very different shooting environments. Africa I would guess is pretty wide open, and the available light is pretty decent. I'm betting it's very dusty though, which in my mind eliminates any lens that telescopes when zooming (such as the 80-400 I believe). Peru, for the most part, is pretty dense jungle, and depending on when you go, potentially VERY wet. Light is at a premium. For either trip, two bodies is essential I think. Just shot in Costa Rica (both on the coast and the cloud forest) and this is what I brought. I used everything and never thought, "I wish I'd brought..."

2 D800s. One mine, one rented. I debated renting a D7100 as my second body (or taking my own D90) but in the end chose two cameras with the exact same UI. I found the low-light capabilities of the 800 invaluable, as I was frequently shooting at ISOs of 2000 in the rainforest.

300mm f/2.8. It's no lightweight, but certainly lighter than the 400mm. Perhaps a 300 f/4 would have been easier to carry, but I liked (and frequently needed) the extra stop. I've never shot with a 400 f/2.8 (but have used an older 80-400), so I can't speak to the difference between the two. Also, in dense jungle you can't always see far enough to make a 400 (or longer with a TC) worthwhile.

TC1.4. Effectively made my 300 a 400 f/4. I felt this was plenty, particularly in dense jungle. Maybe on the Serengetti you'd want more reach. I chose the 1.4 over the 1.7 or 2.0 because I felt (and was told by some pretty experienced shooters) that I'd need the light. I shot wide open at ISO 2000 a lot. I often used a tripod when I could, but often things happen so fast around you that grabbing and setting up a tripod is a luxury.

17-35. Great for scenery and for shooting the rainforest canopy. A 24-70 would have been good too, although I chose this based on weight and the fact that it didn't telescope.

70-200. As it turned out, I used this a ton for monkey shots in the jungle. Given that I was frequently fighting the lack of available light, the shorter 200mm focal length often resulted in sharper images at shutter speeds under 1/200s. I also ended up using this lens for scenery more than I expected.

105 macro. I had visions of shooting vividly colored frogs. Didn't see a single one. I did, however, get really cool shots of leaf cutter ants, butter flies, and some great flower shots when we went to an orchid farm one day. It ended up being my least used piece of gear.

A double Black Rapid. What an awesome piece of gear. I did a lot of hiking carrying two D800s plus my two long lenses and it was really well balanced. It's a bit of a pain negotiating the attachment and tripod plates, but part of that is that I use a Vanguard tripod, which seems to be compatible with nothing.

Filters. I brought a CPL for hazy days and a 10-stop filter for waterfalls, etc. Both got used.

Here's some non-camera gear I brought.
Plastic bags. Bring a ton. I was frequently making wet landings in a zodiac from a small ship. One day while waiting to head back, I took a direct hit with a wave. It could have been a disaster. Fortunately, I had everything packed in plastic bags and the rain cover over my bag. Nothing got wet. Next time I'm buying a dry bag though.

Plastic covers like these:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/891383-REG/ruggard_rc_p18_18_plastic_rain_cover.html. Best $6 I ever spent.

Anti-fog cloths, like this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/374564-REG/Nikon_8073_Fog_Eliminator_Cloths_3_Pack.html
You're going to be moving from cool dry environments to warm moist environments all day long. You're lenses are going to fog. If you can, keep your stuff out of air conditioning. Some people on my trip learned this the hard way. They'd get out and find that they couldn't shoot for the first two hours of a hike because their gear was fogged.

A small bag tightly packed with pieces of foam rubber. I spent a ton of time shooting from a zodiac and this helped dull some of the vibrations.

As far as technique went, I spot metered almost all the time. With the light leaking in from the rainforest canopy behind my subjects, I found that this was the best way to go.

This is a small sample of what I came home with. I'm still adding to it.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdanford/sets/72157639295351024/

WestEndBoy

This is a small sample of what I came home with. I'm still adding to it.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdanford/sets/72157639295351024/

Well done. I am sure that we will find your equipment recommendations invaluable.

henrik1963

@Proudgeek: Some very nice shots. And it seems very sound advice. I often wish I had two camera bodies - it is a pain to change lenses right when you see a good shot :-)

How much did you crop? I´m thinking the main advantages of a D800 over a D4 is the extra pixels?

atjgr

Id say def d4 over d800 unless you have a really easy environment to work in. IE a zoo id go with d800 in the wild you may only get ones chance for that pic! so go d4 for speed and focus imo.

As ms.moto said get a 300 2.8 with tc or 400 2.8, imo 300 .28 is about as big as you can get for handheld.. yes I know you can hand hold the bigger lenses but not for ages and long walks.

24-70 2.8 excellent all arounder... or get a prime the 35 1.4 sigma is great once you learn it.

proudgeek

How much did you crop? I´m thinking the main advantages of a D800 over a D4 is the extra pixels?

Quite often. Sometimes because I needed the reach, other times for composition purposes.

Photobug

Two bodies are mandatory. Heard stories both ways of terrible dust in cameras and others that had not issues. A friend spent 4 days on safari and the majority of his shots were 100 to 200mm because the animals were so close to the vehicle. He did not have anything longer than 300mm and he missed some shots because of that. Told him to take a 1.4 or 1.7X along and he didn't go buy one. He won't admit he needed one either. )

adamz

In perfect world I would go with both DX and FX camera (though often I go only with one FX as I'm not happy with carrying two FX cameras along). why? because of the reach. 300/2.8 becomes 450/2.8 on DX, add TC and you end up with 630mm/4... nice. wanna save some money, get 300/4, add TC and end up with 630/5.6 - not bad either.

Golf007sd

Note the RRS stuff as well

henrik1963

Damn this hobby could turn in to a money pit :-) Plane tickets to Africa, a D4s body, a D810 body............

haroldp

I used to use the 200-400 / 4 for wildlife, but now use it indoors for theater work.
My wildlife kit is usually a D800e with 400/2.8 with either tce17 II (for eagles) or tce20 III (other little birdies) on a tripod, gimbal etc. and the 80-400 (sometimes with tce14 eII) on a D3x around my neck for when things get closer.

works for me.

It is all still cheaper than golf or boating.

Regards .... H

donaldejose

"bird photography in Peru on an Amazon cruise and a safari in the Masai Mara which will be for wildlife and birding"

Have you ever shot with one of the "big" telephotos? Can you handhold it or do you need a tripod? If you select a lens which requires a tripod can you use it on a moving boat or vehicle from which you have to shoot? There can be a mutually exclusive delema; you want 500mm to get close enough to birds and you want f2.8 for speed. The Nikon 500 mm does not come in f2.8. The 400mm f2.8 gets too heavy. The 300 f2.8 is light enough for hand holding but will not get you close enough to birds from a boat. And who is going to have to carry all this gear anyway? Thus, compromises must be made.

Probably worth reading.
http://bythom.com/photographic-travel/africa/how-to-think-about-equipmen.html

Golf007sd

It is all still cheaper than golf or boating.

Wait a minute...you are right on the boating, but golf...are you telling me you break that many clubs and lose that many balls per round?

michael66

Wait a minute...you are right on the boating, but golf...are you telling me you break that many clubs and lose that many balls per round?

Consider the fees for a round of golf. A modern course will run you close to $70. Forty rounds could buy you a new 80-400.

Pebble Beach is almost $500. I know many avid golfers that spend several thousand for a week of golf; including the airfare, hotel and fees. I'll take the lens and put in some driving and putting practice at our local club.

And then there is accidental damage...

Golf007sd

Golfing+fine dining+photography gear....hmm let's see...yah that is how I roll. Bring it all...life is to short.

Msmoto

Well, the 400mm f/2.8 works

Or the "in your face" version
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/9719117724/sizes/o/

spraynpray

Oh, shoot! That is a great image Tommie.

haroldp

Golfing+fine dining+photography gear....hmm let's see...yah that is how I roll. Bring it all...life is to short.

It is a matter of priorities, at Conowingo, where the Eagles live, I see lots of 400/2.8 and 600/4 's coming out of cars worth a fraction of the lens.

Top lenses also hold a significant fraction of their value for a long time. Digital camera bodies hold their value for as long as it takes to mount the first lens.

.... H

henrik1963

Well said haroldp. I am sure msmotos 400 2.8 will keep on producing stunning images even if it is now "the old model" :-)

Fritz

Just like junior high school: if a lion can run 35 miles per hour and you are 60 yards from the lion, how long will it take the average lion to run over you? It would appear that Darwin is alive and well on safari.

Russ

Think twice before buying Nikons 70-200 VR Zoom. Nikon has had a policy of "built-in obsolescence"since about 2006. I bought this lens in 2007 and the auto focus died last year and Nikon wants $600.00 to repair it. That is their cost to produce a new lens. I don't know if this built-in obsolescence is limited to lenses for export (to the United States) or if it includes lenses for domestic use in Japan. I'm not buying new AF lenses, I'm saving my money for repairs.
Russ

beakon

I've only seen 2 small mentions of the Sigma 120-300 F2.8... It's a great lens that works well with Sigmas TCs and saves you some coin as well! It's what I use over the big primes. a 2x TX turns it into 240-600 F5.6!

Photobug

Well, the 400mm f/2.8 works

Or the "in your face" version
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/9719117724/sizes/o/

Tommie, outstanding. Great work. Love the "in your face" enlargement.