Complete kit change thoughts

I am considering a total gear reformation, and wanted to put it out there for some thoughts. Over the first three years of so of my photography career I put together the kit that I have and then spent the following 3 and a half years just shooting it. Over those years I shot a lot of things, from sideline college football for four years, concerts, weddings, people, and much more. I have always been able to put together a good setup for any occasion. But I find the more I have settled into my photography, I can catagorize about 80% of my shooting in just two areas, wide angle landscape and birding, and bump that up to 95+% under the category of “travel.” I have a lot of amazing and great lenses, but many end up sitting in my bag too much to justify having them to cover that remaing 5% when other lenses would accomplish the 95% better than what I have. I have considered selling some of these lenses on their own, but didn’t want to put any gaps in my kit, so I am thinking of a sweeping major change instead.

The only things I would keep out of my current gear would be my good ole’ 20D, because it is worth more to me than I would be able to get for it, my 17-40 F4L which has never let me down, and the 400 F5.6L which is my favorite lens.

I would sell the following:
5D Classic w/grip
1DMKIII
24-105L
50 1.4
70-200 2.8 non-is L
300 2.8 IS L
580EX
Odds and ends

And use those funds to get the following at an even trade:
7D w/grip
50 1.8
70-300 IS L
500 F4 IS L
430EX
Gitzo tripod with Wimberley gimbal head.

Then buy a 1DX once they are widely available at my own expense.

I feel like the 7D paired with the 500 F4 and a 1.4x when needed would be the best distance birding setup out there; except the new versions of the 500 and 600 that are delayed and double the price. I think the 70-300 IS L would be a better pairing with the 17-40 for a lighter travel load on vacations (today I generally travel with at least two bodies and four lenses, if not my whole kit, which is very cumbersome to carry even in my early 20’s). It would be more versatile for my wife, who likes to tag along with me and shoot but doesn’t take it as seriously. I would add in the 1DX for both full frame landscape on the 17-40 and birds in flight use with the 400 5.6. Lastly I would trade down to the 50 1.8 and 430EX for the once in a blue moon I want to play with low light or flash photography, which the last six years has proven to me is very rarely.

Brilliant genius plan or mad scientist scheme?

My guess is that you will be disappointed going from the 1DmkIII to a 7d. Yeah, you'll get more pixels, but you'll also get less definition and much more noise. Also, there's no iso advantage, as with the 7d one needs to shoot about a stop over exposed to reduce noise at high iso's. This is my opinion, fwiw. Also, the 7d + grip is significantly heavier than the mkIII .

I also don't see the real logic behind going with the 7D (which I love) over the 1D3. What's your thinking if I may ask? 1.6 v. 1.3?

-F

twoshadows wrote in post #13463502
My guess is that you will be disappointed going from the 1DmkIII to a 7d. Yeah, you'll get more pixels, but you'll also get less definition and much more noise. Also, there's no iso advantage, as with the 7d one needs to shoot about a stop over exposed to reduce noise at high iso's. This is my opinion, fwiw. Also, the 7d + grip is significantly heavier than the mkIII .

Thanks very much, that is good and helpful information. But if I literally would only use the 7D on the 500 F4 on a tripod, and pick up the 1DX for everything else do you still think I should keep the 1dMKIII over the 7D?

In a perfect world I would like Canon to announce a 7D MKII with a little bigger raw image burst buffer, a bit more complete weather sealing, and better high ISO performance.

Fernando wrote in post #13463543
I also don't see the real logic behind going with the 7D (which I love) over the 1D3. What's your thinking if I may ask? 1.6 v. 1.3?

-F

Thanks for the response.
1.6 and 18mp on the 7D to maximize the 500 F4's reach while still having good focus performance and FPS as opposed to the 60D.

I would still pick up the 1DX down the line for maximum focus capability for moving targets and ISO performance and full frame capability for wide angle.

Billginthekeys wrote in post #13463671
Thanks very much, that is good and helpful information. But if I literally would only use the 7D on the 500 F4 on a tripod, and pick up the 1DX for everything else do you still think I should keep the 1dMKIII over the 7D?

In a perfect world I would like Canon to announce a 7D MKII with a little bigger raw image burst buffer, a bit more complete weather sealing, and better high ISO performance.

Honestly, the 7d is very capable camera; especially at lower isos.

My nit with the one I owned was that at high isos there was a lot of noise, I had to shoot a stop over exposed and the resulting files were comparatively hard to work with. For birding it was pretty good (see my hummingbird portfolio on my website), although I wouldn't shoot past iso800 with it. Also, the 7d I owned would not play nice with my 70-200 II -not even after both were sent to Canon each separately and then together - and the result was mushy photos (of anything past 10 ft away) that I really can't use.

I should also point out that I had even worse noise and AF problems with the first 7d that I owned and returned.

And while the 7d's AF is very good (good enough for birding, for example), I think the 1DmkIII's is a little better (more consistent - better for tough to shoot sports like volleyball & basketball).

But if your main focus is birding, I think the 7d will be fine.

twoshadows wrote in post #13463738
Honestly, the 7d is very capable camera; especially at lower isos.

My nit with the one I owned was that at high isos there was a lot of noise, I had to shoot a stop over exposed and the resulting files were comparatively hard to work with. For birding it was pretty good (see my hummingbird portfolio on my website), although I wouldn't shoot past iso800 with it. Also, the 7d I owned would not play nice with my 70-200 II -not even after both were sent to Canon each separately and then together - and the result was mushy photos (of anything past 10 ft away) that I really can't use.

I should also point out that I had even worse noise and AF problems with the first 7d that I owned and returned.

And while the 7d's AF is very good (good enough for birding, for example), I think the 1DmkIII's is a little better (more consistent - better for tough to shoot sports like volleyball & basketball).

But if your main focus is birding, I think the 7d will be fine.

Aside:
Nice hummingbirds, I am looking forward to taking the 500 w/ a tripod back to Costa Rica to get some great hummingbirds as well. Better beamer on some of those shots? Which lens?

Back to point:
I would agree the 1D series is the best for sports, I did a number of sports working for my college newspaper at the University of Miami. Even shot a season with the 1D Classic, despite its more than obvious limitations it was still a capable piece of gear. I would always need to have a 1-series camera of some sort in my kit if for no other reason than the total weather sealing as well.

Do NOT get the 7D at this point. My interests are basically same as yours - birding mostly. Also, the 300/2.8 IS + 2X-III is great combo. A friend has it and it seems it is really good. I used to have the 300/2.8IS and would buy one in a hurry if money was not an object. I also have the 2X-III and used it with 500L in Africa and it is an impressive piece of glass. Also, in CR, the 300/2.8 was quite useful as the light wasn't always great, so the 2.8 came in handy.

I also had a 7D as a backup in Africa and during processing compared, multiple times, the 7D raw files to 1D4 raw files and there is NO comparison - none... May be the 7D I had sucked, but it is too close for a replacement and I would NOT buy it at this time.

Rest of the kit looks fine. Do take a look at 70-200 f/2.8IS-II to use with 1.4X-III and 2X-III in addition to 70-300L. Also there are other options for Gimbal (I have one for sale on FM - Jobu-Black Widow). My personal preference is the Mongoose for its weight.

Good luck

Thanks for the thoughts. I am using the 300 2.8 w/ 2X II right now, and while the III looks to retain better image quality (especially with the 300 II), I still think the focus speed is a little slow, and the 500 would be slightly sharper, even with a 1.4x.

I do agree with you that the canopy can be unforgiving in CR, and I have had misgivings about getting rid of all of my 2.8 glass when I might go there again. I can always figure something out or rent a 70-200 IS II if I do go, since I really don't use the 2.8 for my regular shooting here in sunny florida.

I am suprised to hear such a lack of love for the 7D all around, and the more I think about that small raw image buffer the more I think it might not be the best camera. When you say no comparison you mean in noise, color, contrast, sharpness? Maybe I will try and trade up my MKIII for a MKIV. Problem is I still want a dedicated high speed capable camera for my 400 5.6 for flyers on my shoulder ready to go at all times, so maybe I should look at picking up a second MK III. How big a step up do you feel the MK IV is from the MK III, especially in the focus system and review screen? I am not a big in camera review person but the pixel density on the MKIII's screen leaves a lot to be desired, sometimes it is hard to even tell if a shot I got was in focus at all.

The more I think about dropping 7K on a brand new untested body, the more crazy that sounds, so I don't think I will be lining up to get it any time too soon.

7D is a fantastic choice for birding. I'd forget the 1Dx for a while and get a used 1D mkiv with the 500 f4L. That's a better choice in my opinion.

ChuckingFluff wrote in post #13484709
7D is a fantastic choice for birding. I'd forget the 1Dx for a while and get a used 1D mkiv with the 500 f4L. That's a better choice in my opinion.

So you would use a MKIV on the 500 over the 7D then?

^^ I sure would it beats it in so many ways.

Thanks for your input.

As a 1D mkIII owner I am sure it is better in many ways, I am sure my MKIII is better than it in many ways. But if my priority is getting the most reach out of the lens, and I have a secondary 400mm on a 1dMKIII for moving targets, do you think the 7D would be a bad choice? I am fully aware the 1D is built better, will focus faster and has more points, shoots more FPS, has a nicer viewfinder, has better custom functions, a bigger buffer, and has a control layout I am familiar with, but the 7D has a third more reach, more MP (which I could take or leave), and seems a very capable action camera in its own right.

Now in six months or a year my budget situation might change, but my idea here was to keep the intitial costs of the switch low by trading, but I don't want to have my dream lens and a gimped camera setup for the next year either.

If you were in my shoes and these were your choices for a birding setup:
Option A
1DMKIII with a 400 5.6L for flyers/movers
7D with a 500 F4 L IS on a tripod w or w/o TC's for waders (which I primarily shoot), still shots, ect.

or

Option B
1DMKIV on 500 F4L IS on a tripod w or w/o TC's
and a 5D or a 20D on the 400 5.6L making flyers much more difficult

Which would you choose?

Hey Billy,

Can I pick option C?
1DMkiii with 500 f4L on tripod w/ or w/o TC
20D with 400L for BIF

I have a 7D, and love it. But unless you are like me, want to get some bird video with voice documentary, 1Mkiii probably is better partner with 500 f4L despite losing the 0.3x field of view.

cfcRebel wrote in post #13485491
Hey Billy,

Can I pick option C?
1DMkiii with 500 f4L on tripod w/ or w/o TC
20D with 400L for BIF

I have a 7D, and love it. But unless you are like me, want to get some bird video with voice documentary, 1Mkiii probably is better partner with 500 f4L despite losing the 0.3x field of view.

Hey Rebel, thanks for stopping by!

Well I do like that option, in the sense that it doesn't require me to buy any gear at all. I mean I like my 20D and all, and it doesn't owe me a penny's more use after all these years of faithful service, but I really get some killer shots with my mkIII and 400 combo, and the 20D just isn't there in FPS or servo tracking. Maybe Option D 1DMKIII on the 500 and 7D on the 400 5.6. Am I crazy, or did I think the 7D was much more well regarded for birding than it actually is? I am beginning to get the feeling that the consensus is the 7D would be a waste of time for a 1 series owner.