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 EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 26 Jul 2015 (Sunday) 20:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7d Mark II or 100-400 II

 
drifter106
Senior Member
Avatar
512 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 106
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Kansas
     
Jul 26, 2015 20:52 |  #1

Started my EOS adventure with the 30d back when it came out. Last April I purchased the 5d Mark III, thoroughly enjoy the camera. One thing I do notice about the 5d over the 30d is the "lack" of reach, typical for a FF vs APS-C . Since I made this change and wanting a quality lens with reach, I had planned on saving up and getting the new version of the 100=400 II. Have been following some of the threads here about the 7d Mark II and now hesitant about getting the 100-400II first.

For those who might have been down this road, would you get the lens before the camera and hope the 30d would suffice for a year or so...or get the 7d mark II and come back in a year and get the lens. I currently have the Canon 70-200 2.8 with a extender. Kinda leaning towards the lens but really want the focus ability and shutter rate that the 7d markII has.

Wanting the reach and shutter speed for wildlife and sports...

Knowing what the 5d mark III offers will I be disappointed trying to use the 30d with 100-400II

Thoughts?

_-


Gear
Remember, what is common knowledge to some is a revelation to others.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
colintf
Senior Member
294 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Bristol, UK
     
Jul 26, 2015 23:56 |  #2

100-400ii and 5d3 is a great Motorsport combo

I use it every weekend :-)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
7,910 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1576
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
Post edited over 3 years ago by BigAl007.
     
Jul 27, 2015 06:08 |  #3

You do realise that the 30D offers EXACTLY ZERO "reach" advantage over a 5DIII? Crop the 5DIII image down to match the field of view of the 30D and you will be left with 8.5 Megapixels, to the 30D's 8. So I would initially get the 100-400 II and just put it on the 5DIII, and take advantage of that camera's advanced AF system, which is virtually identical to that on the 7DII. Considering how much newer the 5DIII is over the 30D it's going to give you so much better quality at the same pixel density.

Then I would look at getting a 7DII, for the additional pixel density to help with the "reach" problems. The AF module in the 7DII is also slightly improved over that in the 5DIII, so that will also be a slight improvement.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,382 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 453
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Jul 27, 2015 08:11 |  #4

drifter106 wrote in post #17645528 (external link)
Started my EOS adventure with the 30d back when it came out. Last April I purchased the 5d Mark III, thoroughly enjoy the camera. One thing I do notice about the 5d over the 30d is the "lack" of reach, typical for a FF vs APS-C . Since I made this change and wanting a quality lens with reach, I had planned on saving up and getting the new version of the 100=400 II. Have been following some of the threads here about the 7d Mark II and now hesitant about getting the 100-400II first.

For those who might have been down this road, would you get the lens before the camera and hope the 30d would suffice for a year or so...or get the 7d mark II and come back in a year and get the lens. I currently have the Canon 70-200 2.8 with a extender. Kinda leaning towards the lens but really want the focus ability and shutter rate that the 7d markII has.

Wanting the reach and shutter speed for wildlife and sports...

Knowing what the 5d mark III offers will I be disappointed trying to use the 30d with 100-400II

Thoughts?
_-

The 7DII and 100-400II will be a great "long reach" combo, and arguably ideal for wildlife (unless you can afford a 1Dx + 600mm prime), but the 5D3 and 100-400II will be a significant (reach) step up from your 5D3 + 70-200 + 1.4x TC. You could also add the 1.4x TC to the 100-400II as the 5D3 will AF at f/8.

You don't mention which of the 70-200 f/2.8 models you have. I understand the 100-400II is competitive with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, but the IS II is a step up from the earlier models - thus if you don't have the IS II then the 100-400II would be a bigger leap in terms of sharpness (especially when comparing the 70-200 with a TC).


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drifter106
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
512 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 106
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Kansas
     
Jul 27, 2015 09:11 |  #5

BigAl007 wrote in post #17645891 (external link)
You do realise that the 30D offers EXACTLY ZERO "reach" advantage over a 5DIII? Crop the 5DIII image down to match the field of view of the 30D and you will be left with 8.5 Megapixels, to the 30D's 8. So I would initially get the 100-400 II and just put it on the 5DIII, and take advantage of that camera's advanced AF system, which is virtually identical to that on the 7DII. Considering how much newer the 5DIII is over the 30D it's going to give you so much better quality at the same pixel density.

Then I would look at getting a 7DII, for the additional pixel density to help with the "reach" problems. The AF module in the 7DII is also slightly improved over that in the 5DIII, so that will also be a slight improvement.

Alan

No, I did not know that...thank you for sharing that.


Gear
Remember, what is common knowledge to some is a revelation to others.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drifter106
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
512 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 106
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Kansas
     
Jul 27, 2015 09:16 |  #6

sploo wrote in post #17646002 (external link)
The 7DII and 100-400II will be a great "long reach" combo, and arguably ideal for wildlife (unless you can afford a 1Dx + 600mm prime), but the 5D3 and 100-400II will be a significant (reach) step up from your 5D3 + 70-200 + 1.4x TC. You could also add the 1.4x TC to the 100-400II as the 5D3 will AF at f/8.

You don't mention which of the 70-200 f/2.8 models you have. I understand the 100-400II is competitive with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, but the IS II is a step up from the earlier models - thus if you don't have the IS II then the 100-400II would be a bigger leap in terms of sharpness (especially when comparing the 70-200 with a TC).


I have the 70-200 without the IS...


so glad I asked this question and got an answer that will help in the decision making process.


thanks 2 both of you guys for the valuable input. Will help me in making the right decision.


Gear
Remember, what is common knowledge to some is a revelation to others.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,027 posts
Likes: 7126
Joined Oct 2009
     
Jul 27, 2015 09:20 |  #7

Both ;-)a


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,323 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 1368
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Jul 27, 2015 09:51 |  #8

I would go with the lens vs the new body. Crop bodies let you get more, overall pixels on the subject, but do not actually give you any more reach/magnification. The subject is reproduced at exactly the same size on the sensor; to get more actual magnification, you have to use a longer lens. Crop bodies for wildlife and stuff are nice because you don't have to start out with a (fairly) heavy crop to get your framing when you're already focal length limited [I.e you already have as long of a lens as you can afford/is available and your subject is still too far away]. In that case you have more pixels covering your subject to start out.

So, short answer would be 5DIII + 100-400II > 7DII + 70-200 non-IS.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,382 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 453
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Jul 27, 2015 10:24 |  #9

drifter106 wrote in post #17646055 (external link)
I have the 70-200 without the IS...

so glad I asked this question and got an answer that will help in the decision making process.

thanks 2 both of you guys for the valuable input. Will help me in making the right decision.

No question then: 100-400II; you should see a huge step in sharpness vs the older 70-200 + TC. With the IS on the 100-400II you'll also be able to shoot at slower shutter speeds when your subject movement allows it.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ksbal
Goldmember
Avatar
2,581 posts
Gallery: 331 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 1998
Joined Sep 2010
Location: N.E. Kansas
     
Jul 27, 2015 10:34 |  #10

I have no idea if this will help or not, but here is some testing a guy did showing off the differences between camera/lens combos... so maybe this will help to have real pictures to back up what you might want first.

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1435631


But I'm agreeing with 'both' :)


Godox/Flashpoint r2 system, plus some canon stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,027 posts
Likes: 7126
Joined Oct 2009
     
Jul 27, 2015 10:56 |  #11

sploo wrote in post #17646126 (external link)
No question then: 100-400II; you should see a huge step in sharpness vs the older 70-200 + TC. With the IS on the 100-400II you'll also be able to shoot at slower shutter speeds when your subject movement allows it.

Yeah. The 70-200 V1 was not known to be a sharp lens.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,382 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 453
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Jul 27, 2015 11:38 |  #12

digital paradise wrote in post #17646154 (external link)
Yeah. The 70-200 V1 was not known to be a sharp lens.

Yea, not a bad lens - but not a patch on the IS II. Anyway, here's a hopefully useful comparison: http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=3​&APIComp=2 (external link)

It's the old 70-200 with a Canon 1.4X TC (at 280mm and f/5.6) vs the 100-400II at 300mm and f/5.6 (both on a 1Ds III). Quite a significant difference.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
48,949 posts
Gallery: 152 photos
Likes: 5540
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Jul 27, 2015 12:03 |  #13

The 100-400mm on the 5D3 is an amazing good combo. I'd get the lens first.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
birder_herper
Senior Member
742 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Post edited over 3 years ago by birder_herper.
     
Jul 27, 2015 15:25 |  #14

Definitely the lens. The 5D3 would play very well with the 100-400 II. As well, the zoom's price probably won't budge in the next year, but the 7D2's may very well drop (and there should be some great deals on used bodies). Actually, the zoom's price may actually increase...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lbsimon
...never exercised in my life
Avatar
2,658 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 246
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Boston, MA
     
Jul 27, 2015 15:32 |  #15

I had the 100-400 II on the 70D to shoot wildlide/birds (but not BIF). As soon as I got a newer camera, the 6D, the wife took away my 70D for herself. Now I am thinking whether or not to get the 7DII, or continue using the 6D.


5D Mark IV | 6D | S110
EF 17-40L | EF 24-105L (two) | EF 70-200L F4 IS | EF 100-400L II | EF 85 1.8 | EF 50 1.8 STM | Canon 1.4x III | Canon 1.4x II
Yongnuo 685 | Nissin Di622 M2 | Nissin Di422

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

6,471 views & 10 likes for this thread
7d Mark II or 100-400 II
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
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 HCH
780 guests, 392 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.