I have rented lenses; split it with another person on the trip. Worked out well. But that was a week long trip, not two weeks.
The trip to Alaska 12 years ago, a couple on that trip had Canon equipment(still film in 2001). They had 500 AND 600mm lenses. Both had thier own backpacks and very sturdy tripods. Those were $7k and $10k lenses back then.
Have a friend a work; he does wildlife photography as hobby. He picked up a D800 body; $$$. And, he uses a 500mm Nikon tele. $8k. Not to mention a bunch of other lenses.
For an Africa "once in a lifetime" trip, I could see $10-15k+ in camera equipment easily. For one person. A D800 body, Flash, 240-120VR, 80-200/2.8-AFS/VR, 300mm VR at a minimum. I would get a second less expensive, but full frame DSLR, since you will want to have a long lens mounted and a short lens. Like the trip with my wife, I could see some pooling of camera body and lenses.
And, this is not to mention a few outdoor and wildlife photo classes/seminars before the trip.
I was shocked at the the price of the trip I linked previously. I read the PDF file when Hogan announced the trip and it sure sounded interesting but then I read the price! :shocked::laughing::laughing::laughing:
I figured I would have to buy or rent about $20,000 worth of gear to go on that trip.
I traded up to a D800 a year or so ago and I have a 70-200mm/F2.8 VRII lens I bought previously. Those two pieces of equipment are flat out magical compared to the equipment I had in the mid 80s. Anyway, to go on a trip like this I would need another D800, plus my other lenses which cover the non super telephoto ranges. I have been renting a 300mm/F4.0 lens, which even with a TC 1.4 teleconverter, is a very sharp lens. However, for a safari you would need at least the 500mm or 600mm lens if not both. One might want to take a 200-400mm/F4 lens instead of the 500mm.
The problem with the 400mm, 500mm, and 600mm lenses is that they are heavy and require another $1,000 worth of tripod and tripod head. I am not even going to discuss the $18k 800mm lens. :laughing:
I have been very tempted to rent the 200-400mm lens, especially after we went to FLA earlier this summer. I found a place where Pelicans where feeding a took quite a few shots. The 300mmF4 with the TC 1.4 worked very well and is light enough to hand hold, though after 2-3 hours, my arms were starting to fall off.
At times, I was wishing for a zoom lens and the 200-400/F4 would have been perfect. I was trying to get photos of the MULTIPLE Pelicans dive bombing the fish but I was never able to quite get what I wanted even though I spent 4-6 hours over two days trying. The 200-400mm/F4 lens would have been helpful but it would likely have required a tripod to hold the camera/lens for a couple of hours. I was trying to get an image like below but with more than one bird.
We are planning to return to the same place next year so I will try again. :laughing: I am not a newby in taking photos including fast moving sports but I still had to adjust what I was doing to get these photos of the Pelicans. The first day, 2-3 hours, where pretty much a bust because my shutter speed was not fast enough. The first day, I had configured the camera to get me a shutter speed around 1200-1600 of a second but it was not quite fast enough. I really needed 2,000 of a second.
These to images were at 1,600 of a second.
I could not quite get more than one bird with just its beak going into the water....
Anyway, a vacation is not the time to figure out to use your gear, especially on a once in a lifetime trip. The Pelican photos took every bit of function from my camera gear, while pushing my photographic experience/knowledge, and technique. It sure was fun. :laughing::laughing::laughing: I need another trip to the same place to try to replicate a Pelican and sunrise photo I took in the 80's and to try to get multiple bird beaks in the water at the same time.
Later,
Dan
