Will I regret it?

Ok probably not the easiest of questions to answer but I just need a bit of reassurance I suppose As most of what I enjoy is taking bird pictures I thought this would be the best section. I shall be selling my 50D in a couple of weeks and purchasing a 7D. At the moment I have a 70-200 F4L and a Canon 1.4TC. I need a bit more reach so I can at least get some different subject matter. The obvious choice would be either a new 300mm or 100-400. However funds are not going to allow it "end of "

So I am looking at the Sigma 150-500, this will give me the desired reach and if I sell the 70-200 and 1.4TC coupled with the reasonable price of the Sigma, I should have enough for a fairly decent walkabout lens which has IS. I would like to find some decent bird shots that have been taken with the Sigma and 7D but I cannot seem to find any out there at the moment. Below are a couple of examples of my work, I do not sell any pics but just do it for my own enjoyment with the odd one or two ending up on the wall, so all in all I suppose if I can match with the Sigma what I can produce at the moment then I will be happy enough Thanks for any feedback.

Not only is the Sigma 150-500 a great lens naked it ain't too bad with a 2X either

With 2X

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

Hi Ken, was wondering when you be along, I knew you had this combo but search facility was down at other place and for the life of me could not find a post from you. Anyway thanks for stopping by, do you have a couple more pics at all that show it off a bit? Anything at a bit of a distance, across a pond or something even if the subject is larger than small birds, and you have had to crop. #2 looks good to me, what was the exif on that one?

I would keep the 50d and use the money to buy a new (L) telephoto. IMO the lens should always be #1 priority. The sigma is a good lens but it isnt near the quality of a Canon telephoto prime or the 100-400. But thats just my opinion.

BirdBoy wrote in post #11001859
I would keep the 50d and use the money to buy a new (L) telephoto. IMO the lens should always be #1 priority. The sigma is a good lens but it isnt near the quality of a Canon telephoto prime or the 100-400. But thats just my opinion.

Thanks birdboy but you seem to have missed the part in my post "I shall be selling my 50D and getting a 7D"

Shot #2 was 1/1000 f8 ISO1600

Here's a crop from a shot at distance of about 1/2 mile, insert shows the full frame.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

BirdBoy wrote in post #11001859
The sigma is a good lens but it isnt near the quality of a Canon telephoto prime or the 100-400. But thats just my opinion.

I'll second that. Whilst it is a great value for money lens with a 500mm reach it does fall short in IQ (particularly sharpness at 500mm) when compared to a Canon 400 prime or 100-400. I have a love/hate relationship with mine and make no bones about it, if I had the purchase over again I would have spent the extra on a Canon 400 prime or 100-400.

Thanks for the input Ken and thank you L.J.G for an honest opinion. I love people throwing stuff into the equation Ok if at a push I go for another L glass I just have to decide whether to keep my converter, sell the camera and bits along with the Nifty Fifty + 70-200 F4L and buy the 300L IS
Or sell the TC along with the 70-200 and buy a 100-400L IS. That would just leave me needing a smaller zoom for general use, something half decent with IS would be useful so any ideas based on that would be a great help.
Thanks once again.

I think you are correct in going for the 7D. As far as glass goes, if I were you I would sell the 100-400 and pick up a 400 f/5.6L. As a bird photographer 95% of the time I am looking for more reach not less and at 400mm the 400 prime is slightly sharper than the 100-400. I love mine.

40D and 400 f/5.6L

i never shoot birds but i saw one just like the one(s) in post #2 and i wish i had my camera cause it let me walk right up to it...

what kind of bird is that? (excuse my ignorance)

For a smaller zoom with IS, the Canon 15-85 is a great walkabout lens.

u8myufo, I'm thinking of also picking up the 7D (but keeping my 50D). Let me know how you like it and the differences between the two, if you don't mind. I'm also shooting birds and hoping the 7D is faster with better resolution.

Thanks...

L.J.G. wrote in post #11002786
I'll second that. Whilst it is a great value for money lens with a 500mm reach it does fall short in IQ (particularly sharpness at 500mm) when compared to a Canon 400 prime or 100-400. I have a love/hate relationship with mine and make no bones about it, if I had the purchase over again I would have spent the extra on a Canon 400 prime or 100-400.

I recently started a thread regarding this, decided I'd just jump in here instead.

Any idea which of these two you'd go with and why. I'm considering each of them, leaning towards the prime right now, but would like some input.

Wonderful pic of the longtail tit

At the end of the day it's the lens that counts, sure the 7D's great, I use one but when you look at photos posted on the many bird forums the good shots, not the ones that show the bird but show the sharp detail it's the lens that's doing it. So get a good prime L lens even if it's just a 400mm f5.6 then decide whether to upgrade the body, that's what I did. Still got my 30D but going from 8meg to 18meg and the additional features, it does make a difference but a 50D that's getting marginal