Years have gone by now need a new rig-suggestions

It's been many years since I last delved into photography and haven't had a bunch of time to research this.

I am looking to become active here again but I need a new rig.
I will be primarily shooting sports,low light game,portrait, and probably some nature.
I pretty know which lenses I want , nifty 50, a 400x2.8 , and a few 1.4's.

Now the body- Last I had was a rebel so I am familiar with them, just not familiar with the 50 plus model changes lol.

Any suggestions would be nice, t3i , EOS 60D, 7D?

I can't help myself but note you are having a rather eclectic set of lenses in your plan.

a $125 nifty fifty (EF 50 f1.8)

a $10,999 EF 400 f2.8

a bunch of f1.4 primes (probably hovering around the $1000 mark (say 2-3) so you are talking about $13,124-14,124 arsenal of lenses and... a Rebel?....???...

hotled wrote in post #16278514
It's been many years since I last delved into photography and haven't had a bunch of time to research this.

I am looking to become active here again but I need a new rig.
I will be primarily shooting sports,low light game,portrait, and probably some nature.
I pretty know which lenses I want , nifty 50, a 400x2.8 , and a few 1.4's.

Now the body- Last I had was a rebel so I am familiar with them, just not familiar with the 50 plus model changes lol.

Any suggestions would be nice, t3i , EOS 60D, 7D?

Things have changed over the years.
If you're primarily shooting sports and low light then those models are not particularly outstanding.
And that 400mm 2.8 will cost over $10,000 !

You might want to rethink the game plan. Maybe a less expensive telephoto lens and a 5DmkIII

watt100 wrote in post #16279163
Things have changed over the years.
If you're primarily shooting sports and low light then those models are not particularly outstanding.
And that 400mm 2.8 will cost over $10,000 !

You might want to rethink the game plan. Maybe a less expensive telephoto lens and a 5DmkIII

Consider that if someone is ready to plunk down 15k on a set he would probably not ask us for advice, especially not with this rather insane mix of equipment.

So here's to the OP, either you are having a good laugh or I advise you to run into the local fotoshop, slap down your credit card(s) and let the shopowner equip you the best way he sees fit.

Wow this place has changed as well.
Just adding notes for lenses I may want in the future and I get hammered.
I was seeking advice on a body appropriate for low light sports, sorry for asking and won't be back to bother you.
Btw: went with a 6D

Don't get too upset. I think the 400 f2.8L threw everyone since it's quite an investment. I'd love one myself but I'm afraid it's not in the cards for me. If money is no object then the new Canon 1d X would be a great camera but it lists for almost $7,000. If you want a good reliable sports and wildlife camera, you still can't beat the 7d. I know it's an old model but it's a great fast-action camera and it can be had for around $1,400 or so (body). I sold my 2 50d's recently and bought a 7d and I'm very happy. You may want to consider the 7d, a 70-200 f2.8L (possibly a 1.4X teleconverter), 24-105 f4L and a 50 f1.8 as a starter package. This would really get you rolling. One you get the old photography juices flowing again, you can easily upgrade. I wish you the best in your endeavors to rekindle your photography interests. Have fun and enjoy!

Loknor wrote in post #16279409
Consider that if someone is ready to plunk down 15k on a set he would probably not ask us for advice, especially not with this rather insane mix of equipment.

So here's to the OP, either you are having a good laugh or I advise you to run into the local fotoshop, slap down your credit card(s) and let the shopowner equip you the best way he sees fit.

Lol. I actually am busting out laughing.

hotled wrote in post #16280168
Wow this place has changed as well.
Just adding notes for lenses I may want in the future and I get hammered.
I was seeking advice on a body appropriate for low light sports, sorry for asking and won't be back to bother you.
Btw: went with a 6D

You run in and name equipment which truly is all over the place in both price and application. The best advise you got was: rethink your game plan.

And now you bought a body which most of us wouldn't pick for low light sports. I'm sure you will manage, but it feels like a rushed decision where you spent a lot of cash, so good luck.

Points taken,
I didn't rush and pull the trigger on the 6d.

Maybe I should put this more realistically.

What would be a good body for sports and wildlife, I do encounter allot of low light situations or limited light at local ball games etc.

I listed the lenses I thought I had remembered and was not accurate about the 400 (sorry my bad) it was actually a 70x200 F4L (I imagine the standard now is 2.8?) I remembered and that was boderline o.k the last time I checked for sports in lower light if I remember correctly.Maybe with the newer sensors and ISO's going up this might have changed?

Ken, A more realistic sports/wildlife body would be a 7d but if you can afford more the 5d Mark III would be a great. I have a 70-200 f4L non-IS lens which I bought from my daughter when she picked up her 70-200 f2.8L IS lens. They are both great. Good luck!

georgebowman wrote in post #16286824
Ken, A more realistic sports/wildlife body would be a 7d but if you can afford more the 5d Mark III would be a great. I have a 70-200 f4L non-IS lens which I bought from my daughter when she picked up her 70-200 f2.8L IS lens. They are both great. Good luck!

My advice in a nutshell

Also check he prime options I PM'ed (85, 135 and 200), those sometimes can be found 2nd hand.