LufthansaFlyer

Speaking from personal experience, get the 150-600, Sport version if possible since its waterproof and dustproof. There's a 'Contemporary' version but its build quality is not as good so rain and sand can easily impact the lens. I took about 30k photos last trip and it was responsible for 75% of them. Though I'm not a canon guy by any stretch, that focal range is pretty perfect for the bush so you probably can't go wrong with the canon either.

And if I can suggest:::::

If you're taking a tripod (if not planning, you might want to!), rent a fast lens capable of 1.8 or faster and in the 15-22mm range. That will make for awesome astro-photography since you'll get a full Milky-way sky to the south at night. I carry a Rokinon 24mm 1.4 for night sky stuff. Rokinon lenses in the wide angle / fast ranges have next to no chromatic aberration which make them better than most for the night sky. They're manual focus, but thats easy to set at infinity and keep it there. You won't regret packing some extra equipment for the night.

Here's one that is 3 images stitched together in case you want to see what it can do:

ChiefNWA

The two places I've looked to rent from both have the 150-600 sport, so looks like I'll be renting that. Plus I'll get the extra length out of it.

I tried astrophotography once but couldn't achieve very good results without pumping the ISO up to 1250 or 1600 which, on a crop sensor at least, resulted in incurable noise. If I can find a fast and cheap lens to rent I'll most certainly take advantage of it and try again as I'll be in Namibia as well, which will be perfect for some astro photography!

Edit - Fantastic shot btw, was that shot in South Africa or elsewhere?

LufthansaFlyer

Thanks, yep the shot was taken in the Sabi Sands.

With astro photography, keep the ISO low (400-1000) and extend the exposure time. The 1.4 lens will make the photo.

The photo I posted was a 10 second exposure at 800 ISO using the rokinon lens. You'll need photoshop or equivalent to really bring out the shot. No camera can create a good star photo without adobe help.

The lens cost about $500, so renting it should be very cheap. But any 1.4-1.8 type wide angle will get you strong results. 1.4 being ideal since its so fast so you can keep your ISO way down. Also, take the photo in 'RAW', not jpeg. JPG auto compression will kill the image.

If you go to the Namib desert you'll have awesome landscape to catch the sky! Enjoy!

ChiefNWA

Thanks for the help! I always shoot in raw and process everything through Lightroom primarily. I'm sure my mistake last time was using the 15-85 at f3.5. I'll do some research and see if I can rent the Rokinon lens. Otherwise, I may just see if I can find a used one. Thanks again!

LufthansaFlyer

yep, the 3.5 is way too slow. 2.8 is usually the bare minimum speed for decent star shots. Lensrental.com has the rokinon for not much at all and they always have rental deals if you watch them on FB or subscribe to their newsletter. Same thing for borrowlens.com

RTW1

Both lenses will work..... but whatever you do, get it some time before you go (or just rent one a for a few days now). Using such a long lens requires experience to get a decent amount of shots that make the grade.... the lenses are heavy and require support and fast shutter times. A 5.6 lens also takes some getting used to, your viewfinder will be somewhat dark.

When renting you might also consider getting a second body...something like a 7D (II). Your 60D will work but its AF is a bit limited for such long lenses and wildlife. Having a second body also prevents you from having to switch lenses in the dust and can provide a nice backup should something break.

And it might be a bit tough as well using one on a vehicle depending what vehicle is used and how many people are booked. Not all make great photo platforms with long lenses....

thesun

4 weeks to go from cell phone camera to DSLR. Unfortunately, I'd say the OP's best bet would be to reschedule the trip if the photography aspect is that important. I'm guessing that's not possible. I've had a DSLR for 8 years its taken many of those years to learn what equipment I like and what I don't. Everyone's different and has different things they prioritize and a different photographic style. I've also learned alot in terms of technique and its not stuff you're going to pick up in a month, you have to just go out and shoot.

I've thought about what I would do on a safari as I really want to do one but it would likely be a once in a lifetime thing. A things that I've read that seem to be key:

You'll be in a vehicle and there isn't really any good way to use a tripod, sometimes you'll be able to use a bean bag to help stabilize your camera. So image stabilization will help, but only if the animal isn't moving. I think if you can get a private guide it may be more flexible but I'd imagine that is ridiculously expensive.

You need a good focal range. You want to be able to enlarge animals that are far away but sometimes they're much closer up.

You don't want to change lenses during the actual safari if you can help it. There's dust you don't want to get into your camera and you don't want to be swapping lenses while something exciting happens. So if possible people bring two bodies, one for the telephoto lens and another for a standard zoom.

I use Canon, if I could only bring one lens, I'd probably rent the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM. Huge focal range from wide to long and best image quality given that it covers such a huge focal range.

If I could bring two lenses and a 2nd body - the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM is amazing both for its image quality and its ridiculous image stabilization. There are faster telephoto lenses but either you sacrifice focal range or they're huge (both in size and price). My 2nd lens would probably be the Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM for shooting landscapes and anything that gets that close.

So that's just my plan if I were to go on a safari tomorrow. As I've never been on a safari, not sure if this is good advice.

mspreh

From what I understand and the "Nat Geo" photographers on the 2 photo expeditions I did, were all freelance. I have heard multiple times that they don't have staff photographers.

This article on Nat Geo's own website further backs that up:

http://intelligenttravel.nationalgeo...-photographer/

DiMAn0684

Not sure if this is already too late, but another vote for 150-600mm from Tamron or Sigma. I've personally used Sigma 150-600mm C in Kenya, and that worked really well for me. Since then Tamron came out with 150-600mm G2 and it gets some nice reviews as well. Hard to go wrong with those lenses for under a $1000.

Mike Jacoubowsky

Agreed! I picked up the earlier version of the Tamron 150-600 and there's no way I could have gotten the shots I did without it. There were plenty of times I was running at 500mm plus the 1.6 crop factor. The picture below was taken from quite a distance. Body was a Canon T3.

GadgetFreak

I was in Zambia and South Africa about 12 years ago. I decided to spring more for lenses than a body. So I got a cropped sensor size DSRL and a Canon 70-210 f/4 L and a 300 mm f/4 L with image stabilization. I probably used the 300mm lens for 80% of my shots. I had a tripod but virtually never used it. When we were on foot I stopped carrying it. And it was not very useful in the vehicle. What I found invaluable was a bean bag rest with a tripod mount. It was great for resting on side of a Land Rover for stabilizing the shot.

ChiefNWA

So my trip to South Africa is coming up next week. I ended up renting the Rokinon 20mm which should be arriving on Monday. I was contemplating the 14mm but I went for the faster lens. I figured I can always stitch the photos together later on.

I'm also picking up the Sigma 150-600 when I get to Joburg.

Mike Jacoubowsky

Are you renting or buying the Sigma 150-600? Check out Sigma's warranty scenario if buying, since many camera warranties are only good for the region where it was purchased. It never occurred to me to rent a lens at the destination. The only downside is not having a chance to get used to it beforehand. In my case, a 150-600 was a lot to get used to, compared to anything I'd used previously. :-)

ChiefNWA

Sorry, slight change of plans. I wrote that above post as I was deciding.

The company I'm renting from in JNB recommended the Canon 100-400 II since this will be my first time using a lens of that size (I do mostly street/landscape photography). Considering I'm on a crop sensor, I should have sufficient reach with that lens. Not being able to try out the Sigma, as you said, was another factor. Since my time in Kruger is fairly limited I wanted a lens that will be easier to get used to. Not bad for $75 for 3.5 days IMO.

I also changed my mind on the Rokinon. For the same price I was able to get the 16mm f2.0. It seems to be a happy medium between the 14mm f2.8 and the 20mm f1.8.

RTW1

The 100-400 II is a great lens.... good thing also is that you won't be changing lenses and that reduces the dust problem. Just try to use a decent camera support in the car like a beanbag. That's the secret for getting really good shots....

Why not go for the Canon 10-22? It's a very useful lens to have....