Need advice or poke in right direction.

I am on the fence!
After a year when I started photographing birds I am slowly developing an urge for the upgrade. And it is getting stronger every day
Currently my gear consists of EOS 7D, 400mm F5.6L and a 1.4x TC.
Right now I see two ways to upgrade with partially using my current gear.
1st- use 7D, 1.4xTC and replace the lens with 500 F4
2nd- use 400mm F5.6L, 1.4xTC and replace the camera with 1D mkIV

I understand I lose some reach going 1D mkIV route, but I gain some AF and better IQ.
Obtaining new lens would give me longest reach, however I am not so happy with 7D
keepers ratio due to not so stellar AF. Would 500 F4 make 7D more productive?
I would love to read some thoughts, and if someone would "straight" me up, I would be more than grateful.
Thanks in advance!

I think either combo will make you more productive. The 1D mkIV will AF better and result with more keepers with higher IQ with the 400... the 500 f4 with the 7D will result in more keepers because of its lower light capabilities and its longer reach and IS.

So the question becomes...no easier! lol I guess I'd go for the 500 and keep the 7D. But I don't think either would be a bad decision. Now that was helpful was it not.

500/4, no question about it (if money and weight are not big factors, which you have not indicated).

First of all, on AF - I truly doubt that you would experience any AF improvement at all with an f/8 combo on the MkIV vs f/4 on the 7D. Also, you would struggle with the keeper rate as you would lose two full stops of light (probably a little more as you would like to stop down a little with the 400/5.6+1.4X combo to get the same results in sharpness). I think that discarding the 7Ds AF as "not stellar" implies that you are doing something wrong that the MkIV is unlikely to help.

Second, on IQ - be aware that the 500/4 has quite a bit better IQ than the 400/5.6 "naked". Add the TC to the 400/5.6 and you have further degradation in IQ (although not major). The only thing the MkIV will help you with here is the better performance on high ISOs.

Thirdly, on DOF - the much smaller aperture with the 400.5.6+1.4x combo will not give you the same shallow DOF, which many times can be the difference between getting a nice shot and a shot with a distracting background.

Grizz wrote in post #14184190
The 1D mkIV will AF better and result with more keepers with higher IQ with the 400...

Do you really think that the MkIV will AF better with an f/8 teleconverter combo than what the 7D will achieve with the 500/4 (one of the fastest AF-lenses in the lineup)?

I think you are greatly underestimating the 7Ds AF capabilities or alternatively overestimating the MkIV (which, by the way, will only be able to utilise the center focus point with the combo and not even as a cross type sensor).

I'd go with the 500mm lens without a doubt. I have the same gear as you and used the 7D with the 500mm + 1.4 extender and was very pleased with the results. The 500mm lens takes a 1.4 extender very well on any camera body...I've used it on my 350D, 40D, 50D, 7D and now my Mark IV so the 500mm is a workhorse and gets the job done in my opinion. Reach is more important for me though and why I decided on the 500mm lens over a pro camera body at the time...my latest purchase was the Mark IV but I was very pleased with the 7D when I used it.

The 400mm f/5.6L lens is a faster focusing lens compared to the 500mm but the extra reach outweighs the focus speed...which is minimal but noticable.

fredrikb81 wrote in post #14184831
I think you are greatly underestimating the 7Ds AF capabilities or alternatively overestimating the MkIV (which, by the way, will only be able to utilise the center focus point with the combo and not even as a cross type sensor).

Not to deviate from the subject but most of the photographers (including me) only use the center point focus for wildlife photography. The Mark IV is by far a superior camera body over the 7D...the best way I can explain the differences between the files from the 7D vs. the files from a Mark IV is how "clean" the files are from the Mark IV....it's very noticable.

The 7D is a great camera body and it took some getting used to (at first) but it did the job for me when I used it along with the 500mm lens at the time. Since the purchase of the Mark IV my line-up is complete but I'm glad I purchased the 500mm lens first over a pro camera body.

Very informative. Thank you all!
500 F4 would be the main route then. And hopefully pro body would come along some day.
It is time to start softening my CFO

fredrikb81 wrote in post #14184831
Do you really think that the MkIV will AF better with an f/8 teleconverter combo than what the 7D will achieve with the 500/4 (one of the fastest AF-lenses in the lineup)?

I think you are greatly underestimating the 7Ds AF capabilities or alternatively overestimating the MkIV (which, by the way, will only be able to utilise the center focus point with the combo and not even as a cross type sensor).

My mistake. I was not taking the tele into consideration even though he does state that is what he will use. Without the tele I stand behind my statements. With the tele I am incorrect. I'd still get the 500, either way.

Duane, I agree with everything you said except for this:

Duane N wrote in post #14185041
Not to deviate from the subject but most of the photographers (including me) only use the center point focus for wildlife photography.

Many wildlife photographers make use of other focus points than the center point. Just a few examples:

• You want to compose right already in the filed to leave as much resolution as possible in the image file. You may then have your subject out of center
  
• Your are close enough to fill the frame with your subject and the critical focus element is out of center (e.g. a bird's eye)
  
• Your are tracking moving subjects (e.g. birds in flight) and want to activate the adjacent focus points as support
  

fredrikb81 wrote in post #14186044
Duane, I agree with everything you said except for this:


Many wildlife photographers make use of other focus points than the center point. Just a few examples:

• You want to compose right already in the filed to leave as much resolution as possible in the image file. You may then have your subject out of center
  
• Your are close enough to fill the frame with your subject and the critical focus element is out of center (e.g. a bird's eye)
  
• Your are tracking moving subjects (e.g. birds in flight) and want to activate the adjacent focus points as support

In addition, as I noted, the center focus point in the mentioned case does not work as a cross sensor and is thereby less accurate.

Oops...I see I forgot to add "Most of the photographers (including me) that I shoot with........" I wasn't speaking for all wildlife photographers....just the ones I shoot with on a daily basis. Some of us use this method.

I'll still stick with the statment I made. I shoot a lot of BIF's and ONLY use the center point focus for still subjects and in-flights...I don't rely on my camera to make up for my mistakes if I loose track of what I'm photographing. Most of what I photograph prefers the cover of trees or dense areas of foliage. Also, my focus button is set to "*" on the back of all my camera bodies so if I'm lucky and I have a subject at close range I compose the image using the movie mode (movie mode activates the IS on my lens and I find it easier to to find the focus area with the IS running rather than using live view), zoom in 10X, focus on what part I want then take the picture.

I can afford to shoot this way because most of my subjects are cooperative but I also know that if I miss a shot (because of me or an un-cooperative subject) I will get another chance in the future.

fredrikb81 wrote in post #14186044
Many wildlife photographers make use of other focus points than the center point. Just a few examples:

• You want to compose right already in the filed to leave as much resolution as possible in the image file. You may then have your subject out of center
  
• Your are close enough to fill the frame with your subject and the critical focus element is out of center (e.g. a bird's eye)
  
• Your are tracking moving subjects (e.g. birds in flight) and want to activate the adjacent focus points as support

In addition, as I noted, the center focus point in the mentioned case does not work as a cross sensor and is thereby less accurate.

Good points, and I use outer points whenever I can, even with my "ancient" 5D Classic!

But when shooting with the 1DMk3 I found myself typically shooting with the 100-400 and a 1.4x TC attached, meaning an f/8 "kit". Fortunately the 1D3 could autofocus and it served me well, but it will only allow use of the center point at f/8! So I just got into the habit of center point shooting for wildlife/birding!