Telephoto help

Hello all, a little help please!

The lens I use the most is a 500 f4 IS (version 1), I love this lens, on my 5D3 it's great....it's served me well for birds, motorsports, airshows and even the odd portrait of my son!

Thing is, it's big and heavy and I often find myself thinking twice about going out because of the effort entailed!

With the upcoming release of the 7D2 and assuming it lives up to it's hype, how would the 7 compare if attached to a 300 2.8 compared to my current set up when it comes to reach? Basically, 22mp FF with 500 compared to 20mp 1.6 crop with 300.

I know it's more than the just the 1.6x when it comes to field of view as it depends on pixel density and the like but I'm struggling to get my head around it all!

This isn't an IQ thing as it's hard to say what the 7D2 will be like.....similarities to the 70D sensor accepted. I would be keeping my 5D3 but getting rid of the 1D3.

So, reach wise, where would I stand (Don't say further back!)

Thanks

The other one to consider is the 400mm DO.

I can't really be of help regarding the "reach" debate, as i find my 500mm is my 500mm no matter what body I put it on, and always want 500mm!

The 300mm isn't exactly light either. As Jake pointed out, there's the 400 DO, but also the 400 non-DO and the 100-400, all much lighter.

The 300 put on the 7D will behave like a 480mm lens on the 35mm frame. It uses all 18 MP (or 20 MP on the 7D2). So that is quite similar wrt reach and MP to the 500mm on the 5D3.

For both rigs you would probably want a tripod. Go with the 400/5.6 or 100-400 on a crop frame and have more reach and no tripod.

I have a 500 already so I'm set up for the weight as far as support goes (current set up will actually be overkill for a 300).

The 400 DO is an option I hadn't considered.

The soon to be released V II of the DO looks amazing!

http://shop.usa.canon.​com …ef-400mm-f-4-do-is-ii-usm

http://www.dpreview.co​m …nd-ef-s-24mm-f-2-8-lenses

It does, but I won't get away with spending that much!

7d2 with 500mm f4

I know weight is an issue but unless you walking a long distance with it and you are not hand holding it much it is not that big of a problem. I would get a cart to make the move easier. Reach of 300mm vs 500 is big difference. I had both for a while and always took 500mm f4 over 300mm f2.8.

bobbyz mentioned it..... I use a Rugged Gear cart to haul my gear around. They are made for shotgun competitions but the gun holders hold tripods and monopods equally well: http://www.ruggedgear.​com …=179/mode=prod/​prd219.htm

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/kykk​3G

"he 300 put on the 7D will behave like a 480mm lens on the 35mm frame."

Hardly. FOV will be "like a 480" bt 300mm is 300mm, no matter what body you put it on .

hrblaine wrote in post #17173915
"he 300 put on the 7D will behave like a 480mm lens on the 35mm frame."

Hardly. FOV will be "like a 480" bt 300mm is 300mm, no matter what body you put it on .

I think most of us know that even though sometimes we wrote the wrong.

gee id like to have your problem if to take the 500 is f4 or not - but pretty hard to go past a 100 - 400 for very convenient all round use - pretty easy to shoot off hand and really good on a monopod and ok with a 1.4 Ext and will be fine on the 7d 2 as will af at f8 at least on cp - but only if you get a good sharp one as some can be a bit soft - my hope is one day canon will make the 400 f5.6 available with IS 11 for say $3/3.5K and that would be worth having I reckon - $6k + and up for the 400 DO is a bit stiff - cmon canon fair go bring out a good budget 400 IS tele that takes a 1.4 ext well for the masses hey !!! - you would sell thousands of them !!

A lot said and good ones too.
Let me add few more lines.

Forget about form factor of body and how it behave. Do not even get into silly conversion talks. Most of your subject are small for the given distance except that rare need for portrait you mentioned (Really surprised me). So the practical difference between 5Diii and 7Dii would be:
- A tad smaller field on later.
- Rapid sequence continuous capture with 7Dii. A major difference: So chance of finding the shoot you wanted in more number of image captures, RAW or jpg. You will definitely see the benefit in spot and action images.
- Same (Almost) AFing despite what is a major subject of discussion in these days. Both are excellent among the best in industry.

Difference you will see on lens side:

Yes a 100-400 will give you very much needed versatility and mobility.
F stop is boarder line and can affect you in low light or fast moving subjects.
IQ is very good and deserve to be called L class but by no means has the ultimate image quality of either your current 500 or proposed 300mm, that both have Cutting Edge quality if that is what you are after or your business demand (To be above average Joe). You simply wont get it with 100-400 or for that matter almost any other lens.

Yes 300 F2.8 is heavy but should comes as total treat compare with what 500 gives you currently. Still don't bet on it for a full even half a day hand held shooting or a long hiking to subject in difficult train. 100-400 will shine here.

Moral of story: If you can deal with what you have and seem happy, continue with 500mm on 7Dii. With your needs, you will probably see a positive difference.

If Same IQ is a must but other factors are important to you, strongly consider 300. added F stop also will come as a total treat on all fields.
Adding a 1.4 TC is a must for its negligible price, and will keep you at same optical reach you have currently with no weakness to be felt in terms of reach.

No matter whether you switch the current lens or not, I believe you need to buy an additional lens, a 100-400 for when need, demands its use and I believe by no ways its going to collect dust in your bag or hand.

If you trade/sell & exchange, your current lens with a 300 and 100-400, you may go even or with only a bit of boost.

Which combination is best for you? Your are the only person that should answer that.

Thanks all, plenty to think about.

I did used to have a 100-400 but sold it a couple of years back, I had hoped that there may have been a version 2 announced at Photokina!

As far as the 500 used for portraits of my son, only done it once! He's still very young (5 months yesterday) and if you get close he gets all serious and stops being natural.....the 500 meant I didn't get noticed!

nellyle wrote in post #17174524
Thanks all, plenty to think about.

I did used to have a 100-400 but sold it a couple of years back, I had hoped that there may have been a version 2 announced at Photokina!

As far as the 500 used for portraits of my son, only done it once! He's still very young (5 months yesterday) and if you get close he gets all serious and stops being natural.....the 500 meant I didn't get noticed!

yes you wont get the same sharpness / IQ as the 500 f4 or the 300 f2.8 of course with the 100 - 400 but if you get a good sharp one its very acceptable and if you have had one in the past you would have a pretty good idea about it - just a great take any where multi purpose budget mid tele I reckon - big fan and I have two of them

I reckon canon probably went back to the drawing board re the 100 - 400 mk 11 when the tam 150 - 600 ( which I also have ) and the 2 x new sigmas 150 - 600 and their very compettitve prices showed up - I reckoned probably stopped the supposedly new 70 - 400 mk 11 and its rumoured price of $2200 - 2500 in its tracks - probably might come back as a 70 - 500 / 600 or similar in the not too distant future but who knows?
cheer s rob

hrblaine wrote in post #17173915
"he 300 put on the 7D will behave like a 480mm lens on the 35mm frame."

Hardly. FOV will be "like a 480" bt 300mm is 300mm, no matter what body you put it on .

Every thread has that one guy who needs to say its wrong