Rightyo, my last SLR was the Canon T90 when I was a teenager (which was stolen!). I'm off to New York and travelling down to Orlando in the next few weeks and looking at buying the 7D andlens for a Kenya safari next year (I've inherited a Land Cruiser in Nairobi itching to be used) and also lenses for underwater use.

So far I'm looking at:

Canon 7D
Canon 580 Flash unit
3 Spare batteries
Hugyfot Housing (thanks to the old sod John Bantin who recommended it and despite him walking past me holding one at the UK Dive show and declaring me a "tyre kicker")
Canon 100-400mm L (or is 70-200mm IS 2.8 with 1.4x better - I'm concious that most safari shots use mininum of 400mm)
Tokina 10-17mm (have used this on a 350D in an Ikelite - liked the lens, hated the housing)
Would deeply appreciate any recommendations for lens around ~20mm - 80/100mm?

What else am I missing, there must be a gem or two of a lens that I've not found - I'd like to get the core of the kit in one go if possible.

Well with a 1.6x crop factor a 100-400 is not too bad a lens for Safari, as long as you get a decent copy. I bought several different copies of this lens before i finally found one that was good, then I bought a 400 f2.8, I digress. The last safari I did was on a fuill frame camera with the 400 which was ok for the bigger and bolder stuff but, as you say, you need more reach.

If you are looking for something fopr underwater macro then the 60mm is certainly something I would consider, as is the 100mm macro (I haven't tried the new "L" version yet but the original version is a great lens).

For then 20mm side of things, I use a 17-40mm F4 L with a B&W +4 Diopter which gives some nice results with pretty good corner sharpness. Yes, you can hit the prime lenses, depending on your budget, but with your existing lenses, a 17-40 and a 60mm macro +/- a 500d diopter then you should have most bases covered for a start.
Personally speaking, with photography in general, you can go overboard with all the lenses and kit and it won't help you take better photographs. (there are exceptions where only specific lenses will do the job)
I've probably rambles on too much but I hope it helps.

for a single safari camera/lens, the 7D and 100-400 is as good as it gets (the 70-200 +1.4 is not really long enough and noticeably degraded by the extender compared to the 100-400). my sense is that later production 100-400s are more consistent, but Canon's quality is inconsistent enough that you really do need to test the lens. A good copy will be useable at f5.6 (although still noticeably better at f8) and not have really serious lack of sharpness on either side (but don't expect too much of the corners)

i prefer the 100 to the 60 as the distance between the front of the port and the subject is very small for the 60 at higher magnifications making lighting very difficult -- the 100 will also let you get close enough to some more skittish critters

you should be good UW with the 10-17 for WA

it's nice to have a lens for scenery in Africa as well, the expanses are generally so great that wide angle is not necessary. unfortunately it doesn't seem like Canon has he perfect choice in the mid-range for crop-fram. the 17-55 f2.8 is optically great, but expensive and somewhat fragile. the 24-105 is kind of on the long side. the 17-85 and kit lenses aren't very sharp. the 17-40 is certainly worth considering as you generally won't be too concerned about lack of light. the 50 1.4 is super sharp (at f2 and above) and reasonably priced, but is a bit long on crop-frame.

Go Nikon Spacker and stop kicking tyres

Your heart says Canon 7D but your head says Nikon D300s or even D700
Have a chat with Diver Mag's Ageing Scribe and ask him what he thinks of his D700 and Hugyfot combo (Money changed hands on that deal)

Have a brilliant shopping trip in the States and enjoy the Safari

Nige

I just got back this summer from a safari with my 40D. The 100-400 is a great choice with a lot of flexibility. Not so great in low light for me, esp at the long end, but with the higher ISO capabilities of the 7D, it may work very well for you. The real pros I saw there were using the 70-200 f2.8 for its low light performance.

As for u/w, the Tokina 10-17 is a great choice for WA. For macro, I love my 60 - easy to use, focuses fast and super sharp. The 100's good too, just takes more practice to use because of the greater working distance.

My 2 cents...

Phil

since Kenya is on the equator, the period of low light between dark and good light is very short (unlike southern Africa), and i don't think heavy shade is usually much of an issue so i found f5.6 not to be a serious limitation - however it is very desirable to have good IQ at 5.6.

as a primary lens, the 70-200 is not long enough and i think a lot of people don't realize how much the teleconverters degrade the image - this seems to be worse on digital cameras than it was on film cameras and seems to me to get worse on higher resolution cameras

Agree from a Kenya standpoint. As one who goes semi-frequently to Kenya, I find you really need to get into the 300m range for most Safari's. While you'll get by with a 200, there's a lot of scenarios where you're just not close enough. Light is generally not an issue as most game drives head in prior to dark to be back at the lodge before it's too dark to see on the roads. In some areas they allow night drives, but usually you'll be looking at something close (under 100m) and then it's a different lens.

I have a ton of photos from various Kenya trips over the past year below. Most was shot with a combination of a 70-200 and a 75-300.

http://dcrainmaker.blogspot.com/2006/12/tr...ce-reports.html

under pressure: This would, of course, explain your height... Nikon? pah. Anyway as for cornering the Ageing Scribe, well let's face it the conversation would rapidly from how great his housing is and turn to:

a: Him mocking me
b: How many models he's slept with
c: How many of them were men
d: When he's going to bring his Mac for me to fix


Thanks for the replies guys, ideally I'd love to get the 100-400mm AND the 70-200mm 2.8 but I think I'll have to pass on the 2nd. Interestingly I just found this site:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews...FLI=4&API=3

Now I'm all excited by this and am busying comparing all the sample shots I can, including with the 1.4x extender (I remember using a 2.0x with my T90 and a 70-210mm and the shots looked bloody awful).

Not overwhelmed by the mid-range choices - the new 15-85mm(?) sounds good but would like to invest in quality (if I turn out to be an utterly crap photographer and return to my under-the-stairs mushroom farm I can always ebay it).

Again, thanks for the replies. Will probably add the 100mm macro to the buy.

I would Highly recommend an Aquatica housing and the 70-200mm 2.8IS My friend bought a Hughyfot for the the 5DMarkII and the controls didn't match the camera seems like a lot of money for it not to work good luck