Lens choice question - on safari with Nikon D40

[StewartR]

I'd be grateful if people could offer any suggestions for a (potential) customer.

She's going on safari next month and wants a decent quality telephoto lens. Her requirements are:
* needs to AF on her Nikon D40
* not too big and heavy (so eg 300mm f/2.8 is out)
* looking to hire instead of buy

I'm struggling to know what to suggest. If she was a Canon user then the 100-400L would be a no-brainer, but the Nikon 80-400VR won't autofocus on a D40.

So far I've thought of:
(1) 70-200mm f/2.8 with a TC of some flavour (but which?)
(2) 300mm f/4 (with a 1.4x TC?)

Any other ideas? Are there any relatively affordable options for buying instead of hiring?

 

[Shutterman]

What about the 70-300 Vr thats not a bad lens for the money.

Failing that the Sigma 70-200 with a 1.4 is not bad... Not sure about the auto focus but I am sure someone will be able to put you right on that.

Nigel

 

[boyfalldown]

I'd add another vote for the 70-300 vr. The 70-200 2.8 doesn't really match the 'not to heavy' requirement.

Hugh

 

[puddleduck]

No idea what they are like optically, but I suppose either the Sigma 120-400 or Sigma 150-500 would fit the bill reach wise, and they will AF.

For a 70-200 VR, the 1.7x TC is the one to go for I think, but tbh its going to be too short - I think she needs to be at 400mm if possible.

The 70-300 VR isn't going to be good enough, unless she can keep it under 250mm and 250mm shooting distances are going to be unlikely.

A Sigma 100-300 with a TC?

EDIT - Actually on a D40, as its a very sharp camera, the 70-300 VR might be OK, although its still 100mm too short.

 

[StewartR]

The 70-200 2.8 doesn't really match the 'not to heavy' requirement.

It think the customer thinks this would be OK, actually.

No idea what they are like optically, but I suppose either the Sigma 120-400 or Sigma 150-500 would fit the bill reach wise, and they will AF.

Unfortunately I think these two might not match the "not too heavy" requirement. But it's worth checking.

 

[RobertP]

Based on my one safari experience a lot of it is in low light (dawn/dusk) so I'd say f2.8 was desirable and so is image stabilising. There are plenty of things you get quite close to so 70-200 2.8 and a telecon for the lions etc would be my suggestion.

 

[StewartR]

What about the 70-300 Vr thats not a bad lens for the money.

I'd add another vote for the 70-300 vr.

Thanks for the suggestion, guys. The customer said she doesn't want to buy a lens that she might not have much use for, but I agree the 70-300 VR is a lot of lens for the money.She might prefer that to hiring. (There's nowhere you can hire one of them.)

 

[Flash In The Pan]

The 70-200 would be very nose heavy on a D40