The Best Camera And Gear For Kenya Part 2

Golden Jackal, Nikon D850, 400 2.8, f/2.8, 1/1250s, ISO 720

So how about the 180-400mm f/4 with the internal 1.4x teleconverter, the ultimate wildlife lens? You may ask.

Well, I have to say that the 180-400 is a very versatile lens. And when in needs, you can just flip the lever and it can get to 560mm f/5.6.

I had the opportunity to compare the images of both lenses because I brought both lenses to Kenya.

The images by the 180-400mm are very sharp. The autofocus speed is very quick.

But compared to the images by 400 2.8, the sharpness of the images in 180-400 looked "weird". They were sharp, but not in the same way as the sharpness of the 400 2.8. The images shot by 400 2.8 looked the most "natural" way of being super sharp, while the 180-400 looked a bit artificial.

Please forgive my very abstract description but I just felt that way. It's very subtle. But if you use both lenses day after day you easily see such huge difference.

If the world doesn't have a 400 2.8, the 180-400 would have been king...

I don't even want to look at the photos taken by the 180-400 once I see those by 400 2.8.

And the bokeh created by 180-400 is inferior to 400 2.8 as you can expect comparing a 2.8 vs a f4 lens.

Don't forget, it's a f/4 lens, meaning that it lets in half of the light, so auto focus is half as slow compared to 400 2.8.

When you have the 1.4x on the 180-400, it became a f/5.6 lens which made it even slower. Some even said they have to stop down to get super sharp images at f/5.6 but I didn't see a big difference at f/5.6, though I see a huge difference no matter what, when compared to 400 2.8.

The 180-400 and 400 2.8 are very similar in price. Why would you choose a f/4 lens vs a f/2.8 lens if you are interested in the fast action world of wild animals who are usually more active in dawn and dusk?

So what about the second must have lens for Kenya?

#2: 70-200 2.8 FL VR

Now that you know how important it is for f/2.8, it's easy to guess my #2 lens. Many would choose the light weight 80-400 (or the Canon 100-400) or the 200-500 lens for the range. But I think having the focal length range means nothing if you can't even autofocus in low light or when you have to use high ISO at f/5.6 or smaller aperture.

In Africa the vastness of landscape is amazing. Some of the big disappointment while photographing in the US is lack of good landscapes at where I see wildlife such as in California. They r usually urban wildlife such as owls on a tree in a city so it’s not easy to get animal smaller in frame to make it work.

So I got stuck with a lot of close up of the animals in the US when the surrounding habitat of the animals didn't add to the harmony.

If the photo doesn't evoke emotion with more habitat I would not try to have animal small in the frame for the sake of it. If the landscape doesn’t harmonize with the animal then it’s a failure.

I know you may still be thinking about the range of 180-400. You actually don’t miss much between 200-400. I first planned to bring a 300 PF f/5.6 to fill in the gap. I never needed it. But the time to switch lens is not feasible.

When you see an opportunity it’s usually already too late to change lens. But the range that covers from 70-200 is very welcomed when you want to include landscape with the animal or when the animals come close (but not too close, otherwise 70 would still be too long).

Nikon D850, Nikon 400 2.8, f/2.8, 1/800s, ISO 64. Amboseli, Kenya.

1/800s, iso 1600, f/2.8 are 3 magical numbers. You need around 1/500s to 1/800s for a sharp Incoming leopard. ISO 1600 for D850 is the limit for 6 feet print without too much noise. You can say D5 and 1dx Mark ii have no noise at iso 8000. Yea I’ve used it. It lost a lot of details too because it has aggressive in camera noise removal algorithm applied.

And since the 70-200 2.8 lens are usually the best selling lens for brands like Nikon, Canon and Sony, they usually have superb image quality and auto focus speed.

(To be continued)

Before I go on, I'm inspired by Tim Ferriss and want to share with you what I've been reading, the quote that I liked, and the gear I enjoyed most lately.

What I've been reading:

I was in Hong Kong for a few days and came upon a magazine interview of one of my favorite Chinese author Ngai Hong. He's one of the most prolific Chinese writer, having written hundreds of sci-fi books and over 400 movie screen plays including Bruce Lee's Fist of Fury.  I loved the interview so I dug deeper on his recent books. Turned out I loved his viewpoints on relationships and life very much. If you can read Chinese, I recommend you get this on kindle by clicking the image of the book below.

 

Quote I love:

I listened to my favorite audio book again today. "War of Art" by Steven Pressfield. In the book he talked about a psychologist who had worked with terminal ill patients. Here's the long quote that made me pondered.

The moment a person learns he’s got terminal cancer, a profound shift takes place in his psyche.  At one stroke in the doctor’s office he becomes aware of what really matters to him.  Things that sixty seconds earlier had seemed all-important suddenly appear meaningless, while people and concerns that he had till then dismissed at once take on supreme importance.

Maybe, he realizes, working this weekend on that big deal at the office isn’t all that vital.  Maybe it’s more important to fly cross-country for his grandson’s graduation.  Maybe it isn’t so crucial that he have the last word in the fight with his wife.  Maybe instead he should tell her how much she means to him and how deeply he has always loved her.

Other thoughts occur to the patient diagnosed as terminal.  What about that gift he had for music?  What became of the passion he once felt to work with the sick and the homeless?  Why do these unlived lives return now with such power and poignancy?

Faced with our imminent extinction, Tom Laughlin believes, all assumptions are called into question. What does our life mean?  Have we lived it right?  Are there vital acts we’ve left unperformed, crucial words unspoken?  Is it too late?

This is how Tom Laughlin’s foundation battles cancer.  He counsels his clients not just to make that shift mentally but to live it out in their lives.  He supports the housewife in resuming her career in social work, urges the businessman to return to the violin, assists the Vietnam vet to write his novel.

Miraculously, cancers go into remission.  People recover.  Is it possible, Tom Laughlin asks, that the disease itself evolved as a consequence of actions taken (or not taken) in our lives?

Could our unlived lives have exacted their vengeance upon us in the form of cancer?  And if they did, can we cure ourselves, now, by living these lives out?