Len R wrote:
Received this proposed itinerary from Kicheche:
November 15-27, 2026
Mara North 3 nights
Bush Olare 5 nights
Valley Naboisho 4 nights.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Len
You can't go wrong at any of those three camps and you will have an amazing time but I would pick two of the three and visit another region. After 7+ days in the Mara/Olare/Naboisho I think you'll appreciate a different change of scenery. Mara and Bush are more similar to each other so I would pick one of those, then do Valley camp. And then add Amboseli for a couple nights to get this experience:
If you decide on Amboseli (Tortillis) I would start there first, and then finish at the Kicheche Camps for the best pacing.
Other options:
1. Head to Rwanda for a day or two of Silverbacks, this would be fine on the last leg of your trip.
2. Go up North to Lewa or similar. But if you decide to go up North I would definitely also go there as your first stop and then finish with the Kicheche Camps.
Len R wrote:
Thanks. Do you think the last two weeks in November is too far into the rainy season?
November is the beginning of the short rains. I would not go anticipating to get on the lake bed. Views of Kilimanjaro are great when the rain clears out the dust but the lake bed becomes inaccessible.
Giza, the black leopard, is all the rage these days up in Laikipia and the other leopards there are very comfortable around vehicles so that might be an option if you want a change of scenery but still want cats. Lake Nakuru in November could be great for the flamingos (it literally turns the lake pink from a distance) and they have rhinos/rothschild's giraffe as well. That said, you will see tons of predators if you stick with your current itinerary, it just doesn't give a ton of variety.
Thanks. Pardon my ignorance, but I've never been on safari. I don't understand the significance of "get on the lake bed." Which lake? What is the advantage of getting on the lake bed?
Thanks again for your help!
Len R wrote:
Thanks. Pardon my ignorance, but I've never been on safari. I don't understand the significance of "get on the lake bed." Which lake? What is the advantage of getting on the lake bed?
Thanks again for your help!
Len
Sorry, that's a fair question.
Many photographers love Amboseli in the dry season because the local lake is dry and you can drive right on to it to photograph herds of elephants crossing it to nearby marshes to drink and eat. It has an otherworldly feel and provides really cool photographic opportunities. When it's wet, however, your truck would get stuck so it's no longer an option. It's why you usually see tours there scheduled for the dry season so you get the whole experience.
Len R wrote:
Thanks. Do you think the last two weeks in November is too far into the rainy season?
Len,
Technically in past years mid to late November has been the start of the short rain season in Kenya but it has been dry the last few years. The weather is unpredictable enough now to say you are rolling the dice as to whether the short rains start in mid November or not. This last winter was a very hot/dry/drought all through the winter months and then boom, the long rains came early in March with heavy rains and this happened below. This is Amboseli air strip.
If you were looking at late November the last few years as a gage you would have been fine booking Amboseli this winter and accessing the lakebeds to get your elephant experience. But considering we have a super El Niño weather pattern forming as we speak it could really affect the weather around the world this winter. So of all winters to roll the dice I might not chance it this year as it might be wet there in November. With that said, if El Niño comes on strong you could be dealing with heavy rain everywhere in Kenya, including up North. Short rains shouldn't be bad enough to affect access, but they can, especially if it's a El Nino flood type winter. And generally speaking the more rain you get, the harder it is to see animals because they have multiple options for water sources and don't need to come to the local watering hole.
This is always the risk you take when scheduling during the shoulder months.
Len R wrote:
Thanks. Pardon my ignorance, but I've never been on safari. I don't understand the significance of "get on the lake bed." Which lake? What is the advantage of getting on the lake bed?
Thanks again for your help!
Len
This is me standing on the dry lakebed. It's an amazing experience I'm not sure where else in the world you can do this, facing off with mock charging elephants 20ft away. If you don't want to get out and flirt with danger, you can enjoy the experience from inside your vehicle, or stand next to it.
I know this is the Canon Forum.
I am trying to decide between these two kits. for a 3 week trip to the Pantanal in Brazil with Jaguar Safari Tours. 90% of the drives are in a skiff type boat (6 seats).
Here is a sample of what i am doing.
Most of you know I have been to Africa 4 times so know the drill more or less.
One with OMS and Canon and the other all OMS.
I want to lose the weight of the RF 100-300, but I am giving up 45mps for 20mps. And I have to be honest, on my last trip with the mixed kit, hard to tell which camera took the shot. With the OM-1 MkII I do tend to "Fill the Frame" more than with the R5 MkII
July 9th is approaching fast and I am torn. Don't want to get there and say "Damn, made the wrong decision."
Thoughts
A few years ago I mostly used a Canon R5 and 100-500 plus Sony with 200-600 on the Panatal rivers. Our boat was enough for more people but we each had a row and I was able to use a monopod for the Sony some of the time. I used a 24-105 for some purposes. A 100-300/2.8 might be good for some subjects. Light is not usually a problem as it is mostly all in the open.
Alan Kefauver wrote:
I know this is the Canon Forum.
I am trying to decide between these two kits. for a 3 week trip to the Pantanal in Brazil with Jaguar Safari Tours. 90% of the drives are in a skiff type boat (6 seats).
Here is a sample of what i am doing.
Most of you know I have been to Africa 4 times so know the drill more or less.
One with OMS and Canon and the other all OMS.
I want to lose the weight of the RF 100-300, but I am giving up 45mps for 20mps. And I have to be honest, on my last trip with the mixed kit, hard to tell which camera took the shot. With the OM-1 MkII I do tend to "Fill the Frame" more than with the R5 MkII
July 9th is approaching fast and I am torn. Don't want to get there and say "Damn, made the wrong decision."
Thoughts
Having shot in the Pantanal several times with both my Nikon kit — Z9/Z8 with the 400TC and 70-200mm — and my Olympus kit with the 150-400mm, I’d keep it simple: take your two OM-1 Mark II bodies, the 150-400mm, 50-100mm, and the 7-14mm if you want some environmental or landscape shots.
When shooting from a boat, stability, flexibility, and reach matter most — especially if the river is crowded with other boats.
