Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 08 Jul 2011 (Friday) 09:58
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Longer glass or crop body

 
OldMechanic
Junior Member
22 posts
Joined Jun 2011
     
Jul 08, 2011 09:58 |  #1

I would like to get a little more distance. Right now I have a 70-200 f2.8L IS and its a bit short with my FF bodies. I shoot commercial photography of sorts and its pefect, but trips to the zoo and nature its lacking.

A buddy suggested picking up a 7D instead of the 70-300, claiming the 70-300 is not as sharp as the 70-200. Not sure how true this is but must admit the 70-200 is a great lens and the body would take up less space and strain on my back.

I'd like to get some thoughts on this before grabbing the 7D.

Thank You




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Jul 08, 2011 10:39 |  #2

Well the most affordable way to get yourself some more reach would be to get a 1.4x teleconverter. IQ should still be quite good with your 70-200.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mr ­ B ­ Pix
Senior Member
492 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Nov 2007
     
Jul 08, 2011 10:47 |  #3

I would pick up an extender or two before I got another body or a 70-300 just to get a little more reach. Think about it, for each extender you actually get the flexibility for another zoom. Plus, you can take it off when you don't need it. You'll lose a small bit on the image quality, but it is at least a cheaper alternative (and takes up much less space) than adding a 7D.
70-200 f2.8
70-200 f2.8 + 1.4x = 98-280 f4
70-200 f2.8 + 2x = 140-400 f5.6


My Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
macroshooter1970
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,494 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Arizona
     
Jul 08, 2011 11:02 |  #4

1.4x TC would be a good option, IQ is good. A crop body just crops doesn't add anything. Although so many feel that way.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dan_bgblue
Senior Member
Avatar
632 posts
Joined May 2008
     
Jul 08, 2011 11:03 as a reply to  @ Mr B Pix's post |  #5

A crop body does not increase a lens's focal length or "reach" vs a full frame body. You need a longer lens. I have no experience with the 70-300 so can't help there.


Gear list: S5IS, 40D, Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS, Canon 70-200 f4 L IS, Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM, Canon 50mm f1.8 mk1, Canon 85mm f1.8, Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM, 430EXII, Kenko 1.4x TC, tripod

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jul 08, 2011 11:16 |  #6

A 1.4x on the MK2 works extremely well. I am amazed by the results and there is very little that amazes me :-)


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
OldMechanic
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
22 posts
Joined Jun 2011
     
Jul 08, 2011 12:35 |  #7

dan_bgblue wrote in post #12725007 (external link)
A crop body does not increase a lens's focal length or "reach" vs a full frame body. You need a longer lens. I have no experience with the 70-300 so can't help there.

I understand its not going to change the actual lense but will change the effective focal length by 1.6 making the 70-200 to 112-320.
My concern is image quality. If the image quality is going to suffer with a $1500 lense or a $500 extender. I could just as easily spend close to the same and buy a 7D and use the better 70-200 glass if it is in fact better. I carry two 5D mkll anyways so swapping one for a 7D doesnt change the load. The 7D or whatever would just be a week-end toy so the budget is faily low.
I guess the question should have been. Is the 70-300L image quality on par with the 70-200.

The budget is $2000
70-300 $1500 plus shipping
7D $1600 plus shipping
2.0 TC $500 plus shipping

Thank you




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kf095
Out buying Wheaties
Avatar
6,807 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 447
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Canada, Ontario, Milton
     
Jul 08, 2011 12:43 |  #8

OldMechanic wrote in post #12725478 (external link)
I understand its not going to change the actual lense but will change the effective focal length by 1.6 making the 70-200 to 112-320.
...

No. It will not get you the magnification of 320.
You'll just still have 200mm on 7D, but FOV will be cut to 320 FOV.
So, you'll have less image at the same distance.

TC will get you optically closer, not 1.6 crop body.
Only if you are going to heavily crop all of your 7D images.


Old Site (external link). M-E and ME blog (external link). Film Flickr (external link). my DigitaL and AnaLog Gear.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
smorter
Goldmember
Avatar
4,506 posts
Likes: 19
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jul 08, 2011 12:46 |  #9

How about a 300 prime?


Wedding Photography Melbourneexternal link
Reviews: 85LII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
OldMechanic
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
22 posts
Joined Jun 2011
     
Jul 08, 2011 12:52 |  #10

kf095 wrote in post #12725516 (external link)
No. It will not get you the magnification of 320.
You'll just still have 200mm on 7D, but FOV will be cut to 320 FOV.
So, you'll have less image at the same distance.

TC will get you optically closer, not 1.6 crop body.
Expert if you are going to heavily crop all of your 7D images.

I guess thats right, if you put it that way ive never owned a crop camera. So what is the TC going to do to the image quality of the 70-200. Every review Ive seen says its not nearly as sharp. On the other hand folks with crop cameras say that the 70-200 is one of the shapest at 200. I guess I need to figure out if loosing FOV is a bad thing. Most pics are just animals, fury feathered and grand kids so FOV for the most part is not an issue. Getting the subject to fill the frame would be first priority since I usually dont crop.

Thank you




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
OldMechanic
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
22 posts
Joined Jun 2011
     
Jul 08, 2011 13:10 |  #11

Thanks for the advice. I just ordered the TC from BH so I guess it can go back if need be.


Thank you




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kf095
Out buying Wheaties
Avatar
6,807 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 447
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Canada, Ontario, Milton
     
Jul 08, 2011 13:13 |  #12

OldMechanic wrote in post #12725567 (external link)
I guess thats right, if you put it that way ive never owned a crop camera. So what is the TC going to do to the image quality of the 70-200. Every review Ive seen says its not nearly as sharp. On the other hand folks with crop cameras say that the 70-200 is one of the shapest at 200. I guess I need to figure out if loosing FOV is a bad thing. Most pics are just animals, fury feathered and grand kids so FOV for the most part is not an issue. Getting the subject to fill the frame would be first priority since I usually dont crop.

Thank you

My 70-200 is sharp at both, FF and 1.6 crop. It is just sharp lens anyway. But it is just F4 non IS.
On 1.6 crop it is good to capture animals pictures at the zoo and on farms. But it is not wild-life lens at all.
I use it a lot for outdoor portraits of my kids with my Rebel.
Indoors it is almost useless for me, due to the 1.6 crop factor, but it still works as H&S portrait lens.

I think in "pictures archive" sub-forum here we should have 70-300 and 70-200 with TC threads and pictures to compare.


Old Site (external link). M-E and ME blog (external link). Film Flickr (external link). my DigitaL and AnaLog Gear.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hairy_moth
Goldmember
Avatar
3,739 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 16
Joined Apr 2009
Location: NJ
     
Jul 08, 2011 13:20 |  #13

Technically, there is no extra reach with a crop.

If you have a FF and a Crop with exactly the same pixel density, there would be no advantage to the crop at all (except for smaller file sizes).

Because crops typically have a higher pixel density that their FF counterparts, and because the pictures come off of the camera 'cropped' as compared to their FF counterparts (assuming all other things, e.g., focal length, remaining the same) the user is left with the perception that the crop has more reach.


7D | 300D | G1X | Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 | EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 | EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro | EF 85mm f/1.8 | 70-200 f/2.8L MkII -- flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
s2kennyc
Senior Member
Avatar
849 posts
Likes: 246
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Southern CA
     
Jul 08, 2011 13:31 |  #14

OldMechanic wrote in post #12725660 (external link)
Thanks for the advice. I just ordered the TC from BH so I guess it can go back if need be.

Thank you

Which TC did you buy? The 2.0x Version 2 or the new Version 3? I haven't heard too many great things about the 2.0x TC Version 2. Also, please note that you lose 2 stops of light using a 2.0x TC.

The 1.4x TC works great and you only lose 1 stop of light with this converter. I've used the 1.4x on the 70-200 Mark II with great results. Very little image quality loss, if any at all, while using this combo.


-Ken
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MT ­ Stringer
Goldmember
Avatar
4,650 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2006
Location: Channelview, Tx
     
Jul 08, 2011 13:32 |  #15

I get confused everytime someone tries to explain the difference in crop body cameras vs full fram or 1.3x for that matter.
Here is the bottom line.
I have a 1D MK3 with the 1.3x crop sensor . I also have a 7D w/1.6x crop sensor. I shoot them with the same lens - a 300 f/2.8. You obviously get more magnification with the 7D and a lot more megapickles to do additional cropping with.

Case in point - Powder puff football game shot with the 7D, 300 f/2.8 and 1.4x teleconverter attached. I was in the stands just like everyone else - no sideline access. For some of those pics, there was a lot of cropping involved, but I still got shots the kids liked.

I would venture to say no one else in those stands got these kind of shots.

Sometimes I use the 7D with the 300 for soccer and have the 70-200 on the MK3 for close in shots.

Goose Creek Powder Puff Football Game (external link)


MaxPreps Profile (external link)

My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,994 views & 0 likes for this thread
Longer glass or crop body
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is MarcusBullen
817 guests, 175 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.