What's new

Safari photos

Wilki31

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I'm going on safari later in the year and will no doubt be taking 100's of photos with my trusted D70s (maybe a D7000, if I can justify it to my other half).

Which ever I end up with, am I best taking photos in RAW format? I keep reading conflicting articles as to whether to go with RAW or JPEG.

Also, is a D7000 a logical step up from a D70s for someone on a modest budge? Thanks.
 
There is never a good reason to shoot jpeg instead of RAW unless memory card or hard drive space are an issue to you. And given how cheap memory is, it shouldn't be.
I don't know what lenses you have, but you're going to want something that can shoot sharp photos at 300+mm, the longer the better really for wildlife. The lens should be your main focus here, not the body.
 
There is never a good reason to shoot jpeg instead of RAW unless memory card or hard drive space are an issue to you. And given how cheap memory is, it shouldn't be.
I don't know what lenses you have, but you're going to want something that can shoot sharp photos at 300+mm, the longer the better really for wildlife. The lens should be your main focus here, not the body.

Alright, well I would completely disagree with this statement. RAW is a preferable format if you have the time to shoot raw and the space to accomodate the files. However there are times when JPG is actually a better choice, and that is when you need to fire a longer burst for action shots - such as a moving animal or sports photography. RAW files are much larger than JPG and even with a very fast memory card (I use a 95 mbs write card myself) once you overwhelm the camera buffer it will slow down considerably and in some cases even stop shooting until it gets a chance to write some of that data out of the buffer and catch up.

Shooting RAW only, for example, on my D5100 with a Sandisk Extreme Pro 95 mbs card, I can usually get a burst of 15-16 images before my camera slows from 4 frames per second down to about 1-2 frames per second. By switching to JPG only mode with the fast card I can shoot at 4 FPS for pretty much as long as I keep the shutter depressed. This can make a difference between getting a good action shot and missing it completely.

So JPG does have it's uses. Now if you have the time and you don't need the longer bursts then RAW would be the best option, because it gives you the most options for editing in post.
 
Thank you both, very helpful & appreciated! It sounds like I'll be switching between formats depending on what's going on and what I'm shooting. Basically JPEG for when there's plenty of action, over to RAW when it's quieter or going for landscapes etc.
 
One of the main reasons for shooting raw on safari trips is the often terrible lighting conditions. Raw will give you more dynamic range and you will be able to rescue shadows and keep highlights. Except for my first trip to Asia I have always shot raw and sacrificed buffer issues to be better protected against unrecoverable exposures.

Write to Dallas@dallasdahms.net.
He lives in South Africa, takes out photo safaris and has lots of experience with this.
 
Thank you both, very helpful & appreciated! It sounds like I'll be switching between formats depending on what's going on and what I'm shooting. Basically JPEG for when there's plenty of action, over to RAW when it's quieter or going for landscapes etc.

Well I'd recommend you invest in a good fast memory card - I use the sandisk extreme pro 95 mbs myself, and then stick with RAW as much as you possibly can to improve your post processing abilities. Test it out and see about how many frames you can get with RAW only and then keep that in mind when your out on safari, only switch to JPG if you really think it's needed to get a long series of action shots.

Generally I'll use JPG only for some sports shooting and on occasion for small fast moving birds. When I do shoot jpg I generally also put the camera in Aperture priority mode or Shutter Priority mode and let it handle the exposure automatically based on my aperture or shutter settings to help minimize any unforseen exposure issues. It isn't a perfect solution of course but it does seem to help.
 
I was just on safari in Sept. and agree whole heartedly with Lew. We were on game drives at every time of day and confined to the vehicle. No preference for light or the angle it came from. I actually started hoping for bright overcast conditions and most of the time just set ISO and aperture priority and hoped for the best. Have a great time and don't forget to have fun as well as take photos. And yes to what Fokker said about the lens. The critters were anywhere from 10 ft. to 200 yds. from the vehicle and there was very little time for changing lenses.
 
I'm going on safari later in the year and will no doubt be taking 100's of photos with my trusted D70s (maybe a D7000, if I can justify it to my other half).

Which ever I end up with, am I best taking photos in RAW format? I keep reading conflicting articles as to whether to go with RAW or JPEG.

Also, is a D7000 a logical step up from a D70s for someone on a modest budge? Thanks.
Okay, multiple issues/questions and multiple answers (I hope).

1. Jpeg vs. RAW. I always shoot RAW. Always. That said...here is when shooting jpeg makes sense:
--you have storage issues (as in you're shooting thousands of photos and only have 1-2 SD cards. Or you don't have an i-cloud or storage drive to dump photos on).
--you can't afford to swap/replace cards b/c it's dusty or wet and you can't safely open your camera to swap a CF/SD card out.
--you are going to shoot a ton of shots and have no intention or ability to do any post-processing (maybe you don't have software, maybe you're in a hurry, maybe you shoot continuously and your work process doesn't allow for much editing...b/c RAW files benefit from sharpening).
--you will be shooting a lot of pictures in sequence or of movement so you want smaller file sizes to reduce buffer overload issues (in which case you wouldn't even shoot at the highest quality Jpeg).
Any of those are valid reasons for preferring jpeg over RAW. Forget all the pros and cons, the only two factors you should use to evaluate are:
--how you prefer to shoot/work (do you have decent editing software?)
--the setting you'll be in. For instance, if you want the option to play with WB after the shot, you'll want RAW. But if every day/setting is going to be pretty constant, than you may not need to adjust WB in post-production.

2. D70s. I had a D70. Great camera, very reliable, very sturdy. But that body sucks in low light and high contrast. And you'll have some high contrast settings. D7000 has much better dynamic range and low-light performance. Plus it has two card slots so that's a plus. Here's the biggest negative I can offer: it shoots SD cards (and your D70s is a CF card camera). So you may want to look at options that shoot CF cards (if you think you're going to bring the D70s along too). In an ideal world, you'd go all photojournalist on us and wear two camera bodies...one with the biggest, humongest zoom you can rent and the other with a mid-range fast glass lens that you can use to shoot movement or in shadow or even people in the lorry you're with.

A couple of tips:
--invest in a tactical vest. Some people swear by backpacks, others by slings, I prefer a holster myself. But you're probably going to be in a vehicle most of the time (rather than on foot). So a backpack or sling is very cumbersome or unworkable. A tac-vest though is just the ticket though, especially if you only have one body but multiple lens.
--if you can rent a 400mm zoom, I'd go for it.
--as I mentioned, in an ideal world you'd be wearing 2 bodies, one with a 400mm zoom and the other with a fast mid-range zoom or a 50mm prime so you can shoot portraits, people inside the range rover, or animals who get within walking distance.
--definitely a polarizing filter.
--get yourself one of those clamps that you can attach a camera to. Screw the camera in to the top of the it, than clamp it on to vehicle door or side view mirror and you've got a tripod. This is a lightweight version of what I have: http://dx.com/p/hgybest-clamp-mount...-cameras-flashlight-black-285676#.Ut5w0Xn0B0s

Have a blast!
 
Last edited:
All. Thank you so much for your very helpful responses. Some things to think about! I had a go with a D7000 in the shops today and loved it so I'll be taking the plunge. It would be very tempting to take 2 cameras but I'll resist!
 
All. Thank you so much for your very helpful responses. Some things to think about! I had a go with a D7000 in the shops today and loved it so I'll be taking the plunge. It would be very tempting to take 2 cameras but I'll resist!

Don't resist, give in! If this is a once in a life-time trip, that second body is insurance. Plus, if you're going to have a big zoom on one body (almost a requirement for safari shooting) than it's nice to have a second body with a much shorter and faster lens. And Traveler's comments is spot on--baseball cap won't do (unless you go for the dorky 'backwards" cap look). Boonie cap with a soft brim you can flip up is perfect.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom