Equipment Decisions for Africa

Hi. I am going to be moving to Africa soon (indefinitely) for work and I have some equipment decisions I need some help with. I currently own a Canon 5d with only 1 lens, a 50 1.4. I have found this combination to give me very good results. I do mostly street photography, documentary photography, and portraits. However, I would like to expand my lens collection to get the best images possible. Would there be any lenses which may be better than the 50 for my kind of photography? A zoom would probably be a good option, but the reports I read about the 24-70 and 24-105 are very mediocre (and there seems to be a huge hassle getting a "good" copy).

I'm even wondering if having a 5d is the right camera over there given it's lack of weather sealing and lack of a sensor cleaning function. I've thought about the new Mark III but wonder if I will lose image quality. I've also thought about the 1Ds and (blasphamy) the Nikon D2x. I've also been thinging of a rangefinder (M8) or even going back to film (would this be much harder to do in Botswana?)

Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Jmbern

The answer to sensor cleaning is a good sensor cleaning kit and a good dust proof case to carry your camera in. I use a bulb blower, Visible Dust Actic Butterfly static brush and Visible Dust swabs and sensor cleaning fluid. This gives me a progression from air to brush to wet cleaning, depending on the nature of the spots on the sensor. When I was in Uganda I only took the bulb and Arctic Butterfly which worked fine, but I got one spot I could not remove until I got home to the wet cleaning system. On my next trip I am taking the whole kit.

I think you are being over-cautious on the 24-70 and 24-105. Both are good lenses and your chances of getting a bad quality are quite remote, not much different from the chance you took getting a bad 50/1.4.

Your interests in photography are obviously different from mine, because if I was going to Botswana my main concern would be a telephoto lens for the wildlife and birds. But then I would also choose a 30D to get the built in 1.6x teleconverter.

As for image quality, the 5D is obviously a good camera, but I have never heard anyone complaining about the image quality from a Mark III, 1Ds or D2X (not blasphamy) or even a 30D if they were competent photographers.

Thanks for the response. My comment about the image quality and Mark III I suppose only relates to the pixel count decrease (however I know image quality has more to do than just pixel count). The ideas about the sensor cleaning stuff if a good one for sure. I'll make sure I pick some up before I go. Thanks, Jmbern.

If you like the 5D/50mm 1.4 combo and you think you'll shoot the same stuff then stick with it. Just look after it and take cleaning stuff as outlined above. The kit I am taking to Nam and Bots in August/Sept is 5D, 50mm 1.4, 24-105mm IS L, 700-200 4.0 IS L and 400mm L, with a 1.4 and 2.0 tcon. That is designed for candid street shooting (5D especially) and wildlife/birds. Canon sell all it's cameras in Southern Africa (expensive tho!) and so locals must be happy with how they cope with dust, etc. I'm not worried based on previous experience. Overall, the 5D is a great choice.

Scott makes a good point about focal length. Going to South Africa every year for work, I am only bringing a telephoto lens on a 1.6 crop camera. For my 1st trip I had a 28-135 and although it was OK for most shots, more reach would have been better. Of course, the target for me is wildlife.

What will you be shooting? I would recommend bringing a telehoto in addition to what you decide to get beause the opportunity to shoot wildlife will probably present itself (except if you are not interested at all). Does not need to be an L, something cheaper like the 70-300 could give you good enough quality and enough reach.

Keep the 5D, get a 24-105L and the 70-200 F/4, IS if you can aford it and a TC1.4. That should work pretty well for you. 24 is decently wide on a FF and you'll have a bit of tele as well.

Thanks for the info. I will be shooting mostly people and street shots. I have thought about the 24-70 or 24-105 however I have been really put off by what I have read on the internet (bad copies etc.). Do you think they are as sharp (or almost as sharp) as the primes (because I've gotten used to the primes and their sharpness). I have also thought about the 135mm F2, 85 1.8, and 70-200 F4.

I think the 24-70 had quality issues for qa period and there were many posts here ... but posts about these problems seem to appear rarely these days and maybe the problems are over. The 24-105 has never had the same issues AFAIC and few report problems. The 24-105 is a great walkaround on a 5D and you should get good shots wide open and excellent shots stopped down a tad. Not prime quality. I don't think any decent zoom will beat a decent prime and a nice 50mm 1.4 is a very nice lens. I personally think the 24-70 is too large and noticiable for a walkaround/candid lens. The hood is the main reason I have never bought one as it is huge. Maybe be useful, but it is still huge

for what you do, get the 24-105L.

condyk wrote in post #3408402
I personally think the 24-70 is too large and noticiable for a walkaround/candid lens. The hood is the main reason I have never bought one as it is huge. Maybe be useful, but it is still huge

not that the 24-105L is much more compact than that. heck, even the 5D is too obvious, we should all just use the pns compacts.

Yeah, I've thought of the compacts too or a rangefinder. The M8 is enticing, however it's ridiculously expensive and I find it difficult to focus- expecially far away subjects (probably needs practice). Would the M8 give better pictures than the 5d? (not a new debate)....