I am not posting this to put anyone particular in the hot seat. This post is a sincere question.

I have an attorney friend that is taking her husband and three young teenage daughters to Africa this year for an extended "safari".

She has asked me for advice on what camera and lens(es)they should purchase for the trip. There is no ambition for them to become photographers but they do wish to have gear that will memorialize the trip. The budget is not unlimited so lets eliminate the high end pro gear for now.

Battery life and type is a concern of theirs. It is my understanding that they do not plan on being around recharging facilities often. Brand is unimportant as there are no pieces of legacy glass or equipment to integrate with.

The more I think about what to recommend the more confused and paranoid I become.

Rick--I recommend the Sigma 120-400 for "entry level" safari-goers (under $1K, available for Canon & Nikon, goes toe to toe with the Nikon & Canon versions which cost twice as much).

If even that is too much then the best 70-300 they can afford.

Camera bodies is trickier since there are so many options, but here too it seems like you more or less get what you pay for so once you decide whether you also want video and which brand you can just decide on your budget & go for it. It's hard to say where "good enough" is since each step up brings more useful capability but more cost and weight.--David

David, The Sigma was not on my short list and now that it has been pointed out it makes more sense than any of my choices. It will also be a good indicator to their real life camera/equipment budget. They are still going to need a kick-around lens for close work.

Since they have youngsters I am tempted to go for a camera with video capabilities. It is easier to pick personal equipment than gear for friends. Wish I could sell the family on the idea of hauling me along as an official photographer; I come with ready made gear. I haven't been to Africa since early 1960 and then the worry was not camera but hunting gear.

Rick--For their all around lens the Nikon 18-200 is of course a winner. Only two drawbacks. First the price. Not exactly disposable at $700. Second the build quality. Nothing wrong with it at all but from experience if you drop it, it will break. Probably going to be true of anything that isn't a full-up high-end pro lens (not that those can't break too), so maybe that's life for whatever they buy.

For less money there are the lower cost Nikon "kit" lenses like the 18-70 or the other lower end Sigma or Tamron lenses. Probably your best bet on the general purpose lens is to buy a camera body kit that includes one, as they are practically given away in some of those kits.--David

David, I respect your thoughts, thanks.
How good is the 18-200 with a 1.4x tele-converter? Does everything get too slow and soft? I have a 1.4x and 2x I could loan them.

Rick--I never recommend using a TC with any of the lenses which, like the 18-200, aren't really designed for them and lose AF as well as quality. I've seen people try to use TCs with the Canon 100-400, Nikon 80-400 and have personally tried with the Sigma 120-400. In all cases I just thought it was like hitting yourself in the head with a hammer. Better off cropping later.

A lot of camera stores seem to try to let people get off "cheap" by selling them those lenses plus a TC, but I wish they wouldn't. They get on safari and go nuts until they give up. For our trips this is the sort of thing we try to coach people on before they ever get there to save them that trauma:-)

So if they need > 200mm for "cheap" the Sigma 70-300 is a budget alternative or the Nikon 70-300 (the new one with AF-S) is excellent but nearly $600 I think. Neither of those work well with a TC either, but at least they get you out ot 300mm.

Otherwise you're either into a super-zoom (Sigma 50-500 for $900, never tried it and I'm of course sceptical of image quality with that zoom range) or something like the 120-400 and a short lens like the 18-70 or whatever works for their budget.

Hope this helps!--David

David, Thanks for the opinions regarding use of a tele-converter. Kind of what I thought but the re-affirmation from you made that a definite no-go. I believe my real chore will be to get a confirmed spending budget from my friends. Making decisions from that point should become easier. I will keep the forum informed both of the buy and the after safari thoughts.

You can count on when decisions are made the actual buys will be done using your affiliate links. Thanks for keeping this forum going. Your forum has been and continues to be an excellent source of valid information for me.

Rick--Glad to help. Thanks for the continued support and I look forward to hearing how it goes for your friends. The really tricky issues you haven't mentioned yet are:

* Redundancy. Most trips of course nothing bad happens. But out of every safari of 8-10 photographers we seem to almost always have at least 1 camera die, and sometimes 2, and sometimes a lens or two. But of course most people are aghast enough at the price of one kit, let alone having any duplicates, so that's a tricy issue for anyone who isn't already a photo enthusiast with multiple cameras.

* Downloading images.

--David

Has anybody had any experience with Sony's A500 dSLR? My nephew asked me about it for exactly the same reason Rick mentioned. What do you think?

I've played with some of the Sony's at tradeshows and have been very impressed. They are not an option for me specifically because they don't have (yet?) any serious long glass otherwise I'd definitely at least try to field test one.

Aside from not having quite all the accessory line ups and long glass the only other knock is they don't have quite the rock solid feel of the pro Nikon & Canons, but they compare very well in price-performance to the prosumer & consumer Nikons & Canons.

Dollar for dollar they provide more rez for less money for sure.--David