Hello all,
I had a once in a lifetime kind of time in Masai Mara. It is a beautiful world out there which could only be experienced and not really described in words.
I think I have got some decent shots. Hope to share with the forum within the next few days.
My preliminary findings/ experience:-
(a) The Canon 5D Mk IV and Nikon D4/D850 etc flagships seemed to have an edge on the K-1 or K-3 when it came to faster autofocus and the frame rate & buffer, and in certain situations were more likely to make images which were keepers. However, this was my first experience shooting wildlife with heavy telephoto lenses like 70-200 and 150-450, and the limitations were perhaps more due to my lack of adequate skills than the inherent camera and lens technology limitations of the Pentax.
(b) I saw some photographers shooting away the D4/ D5, practically without a care in the world about reaching the buffer limit. It was simple - just arrive at the scene, focus and fire away. One of the many hundreds should be a decent picture. Well, being essentially the landscape photographer who used to love the Velvia 50 and the slow and methodical approach to photography, I really did not know what you would call this automated firing of shutter to click hundreds of images in a few minutes. Anyway, I slowly learnt important aspects about what to shoot, to shoot or not, how to shoot, how to not reach the buffer limit, to bracket or not to bracket, how many images of the same subject or scene are good enough etc. Also, playing around with the crop mode of the K-1, I learnt to get better frame rate and buffer.
(c) I shot the K1 mostly with the 70-200 and the K3 with 150-450. When one camera would reach its buffer while photographing evolving scene or action, I could simply drop it aside and pick up another body to continue shooting. These occasions were very few.
(d) The Pentax 645Z was stand-by always. The 28-45 was not of much use because the whole trip was about chasing the big 5. However, in other times too, the ultra-wide angle lens is not of much use in the wide open plains of the Mara, particularly because you cannot come out of the vehicle under any circumstances. (I don't know how David Yarrow and Nick Brandt manage to do that...perhaps special privileges). So I mostly shot the 645Z on a few occasions with the 90mm f/2.8 (which has FOV of about 72mm in FF). Whenever I could use this combination, I found that the resultant images surpassed anything that the K-1, K-3, Canon 5D or the Nikon D4 produced. There was a certain 3-D look to the 645Z images, compared to which the other cameras produced images which could be called "flatter".
I could have come back with more keepers than what I seem to so far. I should have practiced more, learnt to use the back focus button, the four focus selection buttons on the 150-450, set the camera to more optimal settings etc. I almost always shot at spot metering and spot focus settings, but that ruined shots at times in the thick foliage or at times I completely missed the opportunity. I should have changed settings based on scene requirements more regularly. I should have also learnt to make better use of the Third Dial on the K-1. The whole activity was conducted at a frenetic pace. Anyway, the limitations were all due to me and my less than adequate skills. The Pentax camera and lenses are more than adequate for wildlife including action.
A lot of lessons learnt and need to be put into practice by shooting more often. For now, I am just happy to have been initiated into a new genre of photography, which is perhaps to the other extreme of the slow and deliberate landscape photography. Far quicker thinking, reflexes, and dexterity with camera and lens controls is required which can only come through many hundreds of hours of actual practice in the field.
Once I was back home, I tried out the Pentax 645Z with the 400mm f/5.6 and 300mm f/4 lenses to shoot some long distance shots as well as birds. To my delight, I found that these combinations work. The 400mm was lightening fast in latching on to focus as long as you knew what menu settings to use and how to focus. At 240mm and 320 FOV in FF, I do not see why I should not use these two telephoto lenses with the Pentax 645Z as the main combination for the next outing for wildlife photography. Practice will be crucial of course, but I feel confident and inspired that the 645Z with its telephoto lenses can shoot wildlife very well with excellent results, as long as you are not into the "automatic machine gun kind of shooting" and wish to make images in a more thoughtful and deliberate manner.
Now a question for the esteemed members:- the 400mm on the 645Z has effective FOV of 320mm in FF. That is at 50MP resolution. Now, if I crop an image from the 645Z to a size equivalent to the FOV rendered by an APSC sensor like that of K3 (at 24/25 MP), would that FOV be equivalent to almost 400*1.5 = 600mm? If that be so, would it not be akin to shooting the same image using the K3 and a 600mm prime lens at f/5.6, and utilising the sharpest centre part of the original 645Z image to get best of both the worlds? Am I thinking correctly? If the answer to this is in the affirmative, perhaps I would just carry the three telephoto lenses (90mm, 300mm and 400mm) with two bodies of 645Z the next time I go for wildlife photography. In any case, I wish to shoot mostly "animals in habitat" rather than birds in flight. And techniques like panning can always yield good images even for high speed action. I may not perhaps get all shots but I would get most of them with these three lenses with FOV equivalent to approx 72mm, 240mm and 320mm in FF.
I wish to thank all forum members who advised me on various aspects of my trip. I became a better photographer due to this guidance. Thank you.
