[ChristianRock]

I would get the KP for the better low light performance, and for extra pixels which means you can take those long pictures in Africa and crop a bit if needed...

And as a 2nd body that would hardly take any space, I would take the GRIII that you are considering. That would be my wide option but I'm not an ultrawide kinda guy.

Then I'd also get the 55-300 PLM as everyone is saying, and the 31 and maybe the 77 (which is mostly covered by the 55-300 except for the larger apertures), but I'm also a primes kinda guy whenever possible . Maybe have the 20-40 in the bag as well since it's small enough.

[Biff]

I second aaacb's recommendation for the 16-85mm WR. And then the 55-300mm PLM. Perhaps add the 1.4 TC.

For fast autofocus, the 55-300mm PLM is fantastic, and it IS sharp. Yes, the 16-85mm WR is big, but it is a quality lens, and complements the 55-300mm range very nicely, with a bit of overlap.

Thanks, and sorry aaacb, I was thinking 16-50 when I read your recommendation. I guess the 16-85 overall has somewhat better specs from what I've read than the 18-135, but is it worth selling the 18- to get it. . . although I see B&H has a KP/16-85 bundle.

---------- Post added 10-20-19 at 08:03 PM ----------

DA 20-40 Limited on the camera.
DA* 11-18 and DA 55-300 PLM in the bag.

Everything from ultra wide to super telephoto covered with three lenses. Great IQ and weather sealed. Throw in a couple of faster primes if you like.

Oh yeah. Get the KP too

Nice combo, but wonder if I should sell the 12-24 to get the 11-18. The 12-24 isn't too shabby.

[Sandy Hancock]

wonder if I should sell the 12-24 to get the 11-18. The 12-24 isn't too shabby.

If you're happy with the 12-24, and don't feel strongly about weather resistance (I do), then sure - save your money

[Biff]

If you're happy with the 12-24, and don't feel strongly about weather resistance (I do), then sure - save your money

Thanks. I feel the same way as you re WR, half of my lenses are WR, but in this case I'll just be a little more careful. . .

[K2 to K50]

Thanks. I feel the same way as you re WR, half of my lenses are WR, but in this case I'll just be a little more careful. . .

How stupid an idea is this: carry a large, clear plastic bag around, and during lens change, both hands, camera with lens, and exchange lens all in, do the changeover and lens cover swaps, inside the plastic bag????

[dbs]

Big plastc bag should work.....
but Murphy has been mentioned...so
the rain may sneak in around or down your arms...into the bag

how do I know....


Dave

[K2 to K50]

Big plastc bag should work.....
but Murphy has been mentioned...so
the rain may sneak in around or down your arms...into the bag

how do I know....


Dave

Rain, yeh, still need extra caution - on the plains of South Africa, and tearing around in 4x4s, I was thinking more of dust protection with the plastic bag suggestion.

[dbs]

Rain, yeh, still need extra caution - on the plains of South Africa, and tearing around in 4x4s, I was thinking more of dust protection with the plastic bag suggestion.

It is still a good option



Dave

[aslyfox]

It is still a good option



Dave

I raised this idea ( changing bag/plastic bag ) when posting before one of my trips and some one at the forums said no because it could cause problems with static

didn't understand why then and not sure now

any thoughts or worries about that ?

[dbs]

I raised this idea ( changing bag/plastic bag ) when posting before one of my trips and some one at the forums said no because it could cause problems with static

didn't understand why then and not sure now

any thoughts or worries about that ?

Ive never really over thought about it...it seems like a way of changing lenses in adverse conditions



Dave

[aslyfox]

Yes, I agree. Sold my earlier model 55-300 a few years ago.

I tend to shoot in pretty close and/or wide. I may only buy a longer lens when I go to Africa. Even then I understand wildlife is often closer than you may expect. Maybe the 100 with a TC even.

based on my limited experience, two trips to Tanzania, yes wildlife will be right next to your vehicle or so far away that I used my 150-450 and cropped like mad to get a usable photo

it all depends on where you are and what they are. some species never seem to be close at all

[Biff]

I'm thinking now of starting very simple, one body one lens. Add as needed for Africa.

Wish it was easier to find a place to handle the K-1 with the 24-70 or 28-105, and get a sense of the handling and weight.

Otherwise maybe it's the KP with 16-85 or just use my 18-135. I'd be really tempted with either the 20-40 or 12-24 though. In a city I could probably go around all day mostly happy with just the 20-40.

[UncleVanya]

I'm thinking now of starting very simple, one body one lens. Add as needed for Africa.

Wish it was easier to find a place to handle the K-1 with the 24-70 or 28-105, and get a sense of the handling and weight.

Otherwise maybe it's the KP with 16-85 or just use my 18-135. I'd be really tempted with either the 20-40 or 12-24 though. In a city I could probably go around all day mostly happy with just the 20-40.

Ok
Unpopular (perhaps) opinion: if only taking one lens, don't bother with a camera with interchangeable lenses. Take a 1" or m43 size sensor camera with a high quality zoom lens built in.

Or bite the bullet, take a kp with 18-135 and 55-300 Plm and maybe a fast prime like an fa 35 f2 or the less fast but versatile and small da 40xs.

As for the 12-24 - perfect city lens. The 20-40 is very nice too. A combo of 20-40 and 55-300 Plm gives flexible light and wr. But the 18-135 is wider and covers more options when life tosses opportunity in your face without time for a lens change. At 24-28mm the 18-135 is probably just as good as the 20-40. I own both and they each have their high points.

[gatorguy]

Ok
Unpopular (perhaps) opinion: if only taking one lens, don't bother with a camera with interchangeable lenses. Take a 1" or m43 size sensor camera with a high quality zoom lens built in. .

I think you've made a great suggestion Uncle.

[UncleVanya]

I think you've made a great suggestion Uncle.

Thanks. My last overseas trip used a Panasonic LX7.


Note the iso and realize this is a q sized sensor. These are sooc largely. The raw files are even better. This folder has shots made in Notre Dame which was so dark in places that the camera revealed details I missed. Also bear in mind these cameras often have true electronic shutter options which can offer silent shooting in places where noise would be a faux pas.
Notre Dame / St. Chapelle / Roman Ruins | Flickr