Buying 7D - My shopping list Opinions/Criticisms please

This will be my first DSLR.I live on the West coast(wet coast)of BC so my choices are related to my weather. It is cloudy, dark and wet most of the fall and winter. I do require great weather sealing as will be shooting in the forest, storms and outdoor events. Main use will beabout 20%landscapes, 30%nature and wildlife, 20% sports, 10% macro, 10% video and 10% protraits. My budgetincluding the 7D body is around $7500CAN and will be buying everything from Henry's in Vancouver. I do not plan on going full frame and will leave these to the pros. I will be buying inDecember and hopefully prices are a bitlower than now. Currently I am in information overload reading thousand of reviews etc.


Here is my list. Thank you all in advance for your responces


Canon EF-S 10-22MM 3.5-4.5 USM
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
Canon Extender EX 2x III
Canon EF 50MM/1.4 AF USM



Filters

B+W77MM UV XS-Pro MRC Filter
B+W77MM CIRCULAR POLARIZER FILTER

CF Card

SANDISK8GB EXTREME CF CARD 60MB/S 400X

Flash

Canon SPEEDLITE 580EX II FLASH

I envy your budget [:D]


3 reactions:


1. The 24-105 makes sense only if you are really going to subject the lens to the elements. Otherwise the EF-S 17-55 (or even one of its less expensive competitors), despite the shorter range, is worth considering for the extra stop.


2. If you expect to use the prime in low light situations with ample space, consider the EF 85 f/1.8 instead of the EF 50 f/1.4. The AF is more reliable on the 85, and the 50 is essentially unusable at 1.4 anyway, while the 85 is very usable at 1.8.


3. I suspect the 2x extender is just gravy -- something you plan to use every once in a while. If so, great. But if you plan to use the extender with the 70-200 most of the time, get the 100-400 instead.

I have the 7D and it is a great camera. If the weatherproofing is that important to you, I would evaluate the EFS 10-22, as it is not weather sealed. But I can see why you may be willing to make that compromise. One thought for your wide anglelens would be the 17-40L, which is weather sealed. I know the 7 mm doesn't seem like much, but it actually results in 18 more degrees FOV (58.4 at 24 mm to 76.6 degrees at 17 mm). Of course, going out to 10 mm gives you 48 degrees more (all the way out to 106.6 degrees).


Also, as others have noted to me:

• 200 mm isn't very long, especially for "wildlife" photography.Think about what wildlife you will be photographing. Is it large (elk)or small (humming bird)?Willit be close or far?
• The results for the 2x III aren't in yet, but there are plenty of concerns over the 2x II and it's impact on IQ.

As thekingb noted, you may want the 100-400L (not weather sealed) or the new 70-300L (weather sealed).If I am adding the numbers up correctly, the following would be very close, andmaybe a little less,in terms of your original "lens" budget:

• EF 17-40 L (wide angle-weather sealed)
• EF 24-105 L (weather sealed)
• EF 85 f/1.8 (portrait lens)
• EF 70-300L (weather sealed)---new lens, I'd recommend waiting for reviews or 100-400L (not weather sealed)
• EF 50 f/1.4 (per your post)

But I've only heard good things about all the lenses on your list and will let others that own them comment more.


Good luck,


Brant

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thekingb

If you expect to use the prime in low light situations with ample space, consider the EF 85 f/1.8 instead of the EF 50 f/1.4. The AF is more reliable on the 85, and the 50 is essentially unusable at 1.4 anyway

---

Unusable might be a little strong. I've gotten plenty of pictures with the 50mm f/1.4 wide open that are satisfactory to me. I own both the 50 1.4 and the 85 1.8, and if I had to keep only one, it would be the 50, especially on a crop body. Keep in mind also that the 50 is much more hand-holdable than the 85.

That sounds like a great kit to me, and it seems really well thought out.


Other things to consider would be:


UV Filter for all of your lenses.


Extra Canon Battery.


I also highly recommend the 1.4X extender, as it has better IQ, faster AF, and better sharpness than the 2X extender. The 2x is also good to have when you need it though.


I don't think One 8GB is enough.., if you're shooting in raw, you will blow right through that. Two 16GB cards is more like it. Did you say Video.., then I say 32GB card. Buy as much storage space as you can afford.


You'll have to ask the others what's better for Video; the 50/1.4 or the 85/1.8 But, personally I think I would rather have the 85/1.8 for portraits and faster AF for indoor sports.


Think of some Camera Bags and Backpacks too.


Nothing like a good Tripod with a remote wired switch and/or Monopod too. I'm just sayin..!


Rich

I'll second Rich's comments - if you're thinking UV filters for protection (there's no other purpose for them for dSLR lenses), you'll want one on each lens rather than swapping them.


I'd definitely wait for the 2x III review and tests with the 70-200 II before getting that - the 2x II has a significant negative impact on IQ.


Get a tripod. Not a cheap one. IMO, Manfrotto offers the best budget/quality compromise.


One 8 GB card will hold about 300 RAW images. If you say 'that's a lot of pictures' you may find you're wrong if you hold the shutter button for a few 8 fps bursts. Get two at least. If nothing else, you can then follow a prudent workflow and keep the images on a card even after you've transferred them to the computer, formatting the card only after the images have been processed and backed up to at least one external drive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homer

Main use will beabout 20%landscapes, 30%nature and wildlife, 20% sports, 10% macro, 10% video and 10% portraits.

---

That's 'a little bit of everything' - and you've got a nice collection of lenses selected. I will point out that the 'majority' (at least, the largest %) you list as nature/wildlife - for that, the 70-200mm will likely not be long enough, and you'd be better off with the 100-400mm. Don't plan on using even the 2x III with the 70-200 as a full-time solution, at least until testing shows the IQ is equivalent (and I wouldn't count on that by any means!).


For tight portraits, I'd say 85mm f/1.8 over 50mm f/1.4 - IQ is better with the 85/1.8, build quality is better too.


I should point out that you have no macro lens on your list. Don't be fooled by the 'macro' printed on the barrel of the 24-105mm...if you really mean 'close-up' (flowers, etc.) it will be ok, but then again, the difference between the 70-200 II + 2x III and the 100-400 would pretty much pay for the 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS.


FWIW, I also shoot'a little bit of everything' (although not really video or sports, with more nature and portraits instead), and my most-used lenses are the 100-400 and 17-55, followed by the 24-105 and 85/1.2L. My 70-200 II delivers great results when I do use it, but IMO the focal length is more suited to FF use (on 1.6x too long indoors, too short for birds/wildlife). However, for that 20% sports it would be a great choice (unless they are indoor sports, in which case the 85/1.8 would probably be better).


Good luck with your decisions!


--John

Also, be aware that the UV filters are necessary to complete the weather sealing of the lenses.


Furthermore, as Brant stated be aware that the 10-22mm and 100-400mm are not weather sealed. John and I were discussing this a couple of weeks ago; the 100-400mm is sharper from 200-400mm over the 70-200mm when it is used with the 2x extender, and the 70-200mm is sharper from 100-200mm and is especially sharper from 70-100mm.


Rich

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard Lane

You'll have to ask the others what's better for Video; the 50/1.4 or the 85/1.8 But, personally I think I would rather have the 85/1.8 for portraits and faster AF for indoor sports.

---

I have used both the 50 and 85 for video. Both are nice, but the 85 produces better IQ at the wide open apertures. Of course, if 85 is too long for your video needs, then it makes no sense.


If you haven't shot video on a DSLR yet, it takes some getting used to. I shoot indoor school events with the 85 on a 7D all the time (I'm a teacher who doubles as the school photog). A tripod is essential if you don't want to get seasick when you watch your movies back. And it helps if you are shooting something without much movement. Changes in subject distance require you to change the focus (particularly at wide open apertures), and it's challenging to keep up.


Have you considered removing the 50 and 10-22 from the list and getting the 35L instead? It's not exactly a wash in terms of $, but I hear nothing but praise for that lens, and it's a better all around focal length on the 7D. I guess it depends on how wide you like to shoot. If you expect to mount the 10-22 (again, as others pointed out, not weather sealed) often, then I understand. Pics at such a wide angle are unique.

Alot of choices, but you don't have to make them all at once. Spread the lens purchase out over a few months so you are continually getting new toys. Its much more fun that way.


My favorite lens you listed would be the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM.


Only recomendation I have is that the EX 2x extender might not be the way to go. I have the 2x II and the image degradation on a zoom lens is just not accetable to me. You might be better served by the 1.4x. (provided that when the new 2x III comes out that it doesn't have extremly great improvement)

Hmmm...let

Could i suggest buying a 1D Mk III instead? i personally had to choose between the 7D and this and finally went all the way to the 1d body. It is amazing and couldnt be happier. Ya cant go wrong with the best canon has to offer. But if Video is what you need then the 7D is a great choice. I would suggest a 17-55 IS in your list as it covers the range of two of those lenses and could save you money for something else. Thanks

I think the 70-200 II with 2X TC is the best option in your budget range. The quality is *way* better than just cropping alone. It

Thanks for the responces. My final decison will be made in a couple months when the new reviews come in. I plan to buy everything at once to get the best deal.Not included in my buget is around $1000 for a decent monopod as well as a tripod, cleaning kit etc. My initial goal is to get the best quality lenses and cover the widest range with the least amount of lenes. I do plan to put UV filters onboth the 24-105 and 70-200 to complete the weather seal.I Here is my reasoning to my choices and sorry if its long


50MM1.4 is chosen as a decent cheap primary lenes. Even though it is 1.4 I know that to get any results 1.8 and above is needed. I figured I needed a low light soultion for around the house and since the 7D has video I figured this would be ample enough, and the 1.4 has manual focus.I don't plan on movies much or use the lens a whole bunch but just wanted that option.


10-22 Is the only wide angle solution I seeasthe 7D is 1.6 and not FF. I did consider the 17-? but just not wide enough for me. I think this will be a fun lens and not concerned that it is not weather proof. Gravy, you bet.


24-105 was picked as this will be my primary carryon lens. I also do some travelling and wanted to carry just one lens. The 17-? and the 24-70 are great but to short for me again. Weather proof and also same filter size as the 70-200 so Isave on buying filters. Having thebonus to use the extender will give me some extra reach when not packing the 70-200. Big feature for me is also his having IS. Pack the 24-105 with the 10-22 and 2EX and on the road I go.


70-200 F2.8 IS II - This is probally Canon`s best zoom lens. Everyone raves about this lens and all reviews and opinions I have read have nothing but praise for the quailty,construction, speed, fast AV and amazing images it captures. If the new 2X III prodces images as the current 1.4X II, I would be more than satisfied.With the 2X III I would have a constant F4.0 and thats where the100-300 and 100-400 start. or above. I do suffer focal length but I believe the 700-200 from 100-200 would exceed the results I would see with the other 2 lenesin the same range. Has IS and againweather sealed.


Primary lens for portraits I feel is not worth buying at this time as I feel I will be shooting very little and could not justfy the cost. For the limited use the 24-105 or even the 50MM will be good enough at this time


Primary macro lens. Only room in the budget for one gravy and decided the 10-22 over the macro.


1D Mk III instead - Did cross my mind but really just over kill for my needs.


I figured this will get my feet on the groud and running and in the future, once I findI need a dedicated lens for either, macro, portraits, orlonger zoom I will explore those options. I do relize there are short comings in any option but went with what I figiured I could live wthout and with. Using th 2EX or 1.4EX will impact image quailty but wil still produce some amazing results that I would be very happy with.





Homer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homer

.....Pack the 24-105 with the 10-22 and 2EX and on the road I go.


70-200 F2.8 IS II - .....With the 2X III I would have a constant F4.0 and thats where the100-300 and 100-400 start or above. I do suffer focal length but I believe the 700-200 from 100-200 would exceed the results I would see with the other 2 lenesin the same range. Has IS and againweather sealed.

---

Hi Homer,


I also have a 7D.


The 1.4EX or 2EX, doesn't work with the 24-105 zoom, you need to have at least 70mm on the short end of the zoom like in the 70-200mm for the extender, or at least 135mm for a prime to use the extenders.


FYI the 135mm f/2L accepts the extenders and it's a sweet lens, but it doesn't have weather sealing.


The 2X extender will make the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II into a 140mm-400mm f/5.6 not f/4. You lose two "Full" stops with the 2X and 1 stop with the 1.4X, your are counting partial stops. THe 1.4X will make that lens a 98mm-280mm f/4L. Furthermore, the 1.4EX gives a 50% decrease in AF speed and the 2EX yields a 75% decrease in AF speed..., AF speed is intentionally sacrificed in order to assist AF performance. This AF hit will be the same for the version III extenders.


I still probably wouldn't change much. The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is awesome. I think your setup is very well thought out. I have all of the same lenses plus a few others, except I don't have the 24-105mm f/4L, I have the 24-70mm f/2.8L instead, but your choice is probably more practical.


Rich

Homer, I have noticed that 50% of your shots will be wildlife and sports, so choosing a right long lens is pretty important to you. 70-200mm2.8II is sure a very nice lens, but it's also very expensive, the IQ from 70-200 2.8 II + 2X TC usually is not acceptable for everybody( to me, the result from 300mm2.8+2X TC is not acceptable most of the time), if you can accept the result then you should accept the result from 70-200mm 2.8 version I right? then why not get 70-200mm 2.8 version I and 400mm 5.6 combo, the costs are almost the same, but you get way better IQ. If you really want that version II zoom, you can still consider the 400mm 5.6 since a mint condition used copy usually cost less than $1000 while a new 2XTC III will cost you $500(TCs III mainly are for version II super telephoto lenses using with 1D body, to take the full advantage of the TCsIII, you need 1D or 1Ds body and new version big white lenses)


another lenses you may consider for indoor sports is the 135mm 2.0 or 85mm 1.8, they both are very good for portraits too and relatively inexpensive.


here is a sample picture I took using 7D+135mm2.0 combo. I posted this picture in this forum before, and just want to show what this combo can do for in door sports, for this kind of lighting condition and speed of action, 7D+135mm 2.0 should be more useful than the 70-200mm2.8


7D, 135mm 2.0, f2.0, 1/2500, ISO 1600


http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/4710/dpp0002e.jpg


just my 2 cents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homer

Pack the 24-105 with the 10-22 and 2EX and on the road I go.

---

Just to re-emphasize what Rich said, the Canon extenders will not work with either of those two lenses. In your proposed collection, the only lens that would take an extender is the 70-200mm zoom. The reason is that the Canon extenders have a front element that protrudes, so a lens mounted to one must have sufficient open space between the lens mount and the rear element.


As a side note, Rich stated, "you need to have at least 70mm on the short end of the zoom" and while that is currently true for the available L zooms (all the 70-200's take an extender), it is not true for the non-L zooms (e.g. the non-L 70-300mm and 70-300mm DO lenses aren't compatible with Canon extenders), and also it will not be true for the newest L telezoom - the new 70-300mm L will not work with an extender.


Note that there are 3rd party extenders (e.g. Kenko) where some models will work with any lens, including the 24-105mm, but the image quality from those is pretty poor.


So, while it's a nice thought to 'pack the 24-105 with the 10-22 and 2EX', unfortunately it's not going to be that simple. [:(] This sort of 'problem' is one reason I have a large collection of lenses. For me, a 2-lens kit for least bulk/weight would be 17-55 + 70-300 DO; a 3-lens kit for least bulk/weight would be 10-22 + 24-105 + 70-300 DO. If I can take more bulk, I take the 100-400mm instead of the 70-300mm DO, since the latter is a reasonably large compromise optically (the new 70-300mm L might solve that issue for me).


One more thought - does your original kit include a flash? If you're going to shoot much indoors, you might want to consider something like a 430EX II (I'd stay away from the 270EX) - the 430 pairs will with the slower 24-105mm for some indoor flexibility.


--John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

As a side note, Rich stated, "you need to have at least 70mm on the short end of the zoom" and while that is currently true for the available L zooms (all the 70-200's take an extender), it is not true for the non-L zooms (e.g. the non-L 70-300mm and 70-300mm DO lenses aren't compatible with Canon extenders), and also it will not be true for the newest L telezoom - the new 70-300mm L will not work with an extender.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

---

Thanks for clearing that up John.


Rich

IIve got most of your gear so here goes.


7D noisy camera but ok if you can live with it being not as good as a full frame quality wise. Its not bad just not great when you push the ISO and want a big print.That said, if you do wildlife and sports it will get pics the full frame wont. Focus system is great.


24-105 is one hell of a do it all lens. Tough as an old boot, sharp and able to survive me knocking mine of a bench onto a concrete floor and standing in pouring rain. It does nothing bad. Buy it.


Why buy the new 70-200? Save the cash and buy the previous version. You wont notice the differance. Unless you are a pro, blow images up, take a magnifying glass and study the image.Ive used both. Cant tell much of a differance.Kept the old version. New version isnt twice as good but was twice what i paid for mine.


Extender mk3. Is it really that much better than the mk2?Will you notice a differance in an A4/A3 print?


50mm 1.4? Amazing. You can use it at 1.4 the quality is excellent but better stopped down a bit. But again, how big do you print?


I think what im trying to say is live in the real world. I stopped chasing technology, buy used gear, save a fortune and dont need the %5 improvement this model has over the last. I dont print bigger than A3 so dont notice any differance in my lens choice from old to new. Will my human eye detect the differance between the new lens to old printed at A3? No.


Mick

Took the plunge. Could not wait as fall is here and cannot miss all the fall colors and all theopportunities . Since there are several rebates I decided to go ahead. Little over budget but thats life. Here is what I ordered and pickup the whole works in storeon Friday. Thanks again for all that responded.
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"]Canon 7D body
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"]Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-size: small;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri;"]Canon <span style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-language: EN-CA;"]EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM<o:p></o:p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-size: small;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri;"]Canon <span style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-language: EN-CA;"]EF-S 10-22mm 3.5-4.5 USM
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"]Canon EX 1.4 II Extender
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"]Canon 580EX II flash
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"]Canon LP-E6 Battery (Extra)
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"]</o:p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"]2 &ndash; B+W 77MM MRC UV filters (1 for 24-105 and 1 for 70-200)
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"]1 &ndash; B+W 77MM Slim MRC UV<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] (For 10-22)
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"]2 &ndash; 4GB Lexar 300X pro CF cards
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"]Lens cleaning kit


Total price including taxes(12%) just under $8900CAD.


Filters are a no brainer as needed to protect the lens investments and also to complete the weather sealing.


24-105 chosen over 17-55 and 24-70 as I wanted a one lens sloution with the furtherest reach and it has IS.Weather sealing was also very important to me.


10-22 was the only solution inwide anglefor a 1.6 format and always found the 24mm just was not wide enough. Also, as said before, gravy and I amnot concerned about weather sealing.


70-200 IS II was a tough decison and tossed around others and in also different ranges (100-300 and 100-400). I weighted the pros and cons read all the reviews/opinions etc and always came back to the IS II. I did not want to get into the should of game and since it was in my budget, why not.I will be adding extenders andI thought the better glass would equal better results.I shoot a lot of eagles and I think this will serve me very well.I went for the EX1.4 II now as I wanted that extra reach, discounted as new versions coming and also EX1.4 IIhad very good reviews and the new EX1.4 III will be almost double what I paid for the II version. Vancouver Island is packed with wildlife and think the 70-200will be on the 7D a lot.


I work in techonolgy for a living so fully aware of the keepupgame but I never have and won't play that game. I know what I purchased will do me well for many years and as I improve my skills I will be ever more happy with my initial choices/investment. I am at the point in my life(Over 50) that nothing beats quaility and if it is in my buget to go for it. I may never exploit all to it's limits but at least I know I have the equipment to make it happen and it will just come down to me.


Homer

Hey Homer,


Wow, has it been a few months already? Boy.., time sure does fly when you're surfing the web. Congratulations on the new gear! That's very exciting news, I think you did a great job and you have a really well balanced kit there. I can't wait to see the first photos.


To get the most out of the new 7D, you may want to consider purchasing a separate Canon EOS-7D book, by Magic Lantern Guides. approx. $20 US. It's much better than the standard owners manual.


http://www.amazon.com/Magic-Lantern-Guides-Canon-EOS/dp/1600596649/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1286331503&amp;sr=8-4


There is also a Blue Crane Digital DVD Series for the Canon 7D and Speedlite.


Volume 1, 7D: Basic Controls &amp; Volume 2, 7D: Advanced Topics &amp; Canon Speedlite 580EX II/ 430EXII: $20 each. If you only buy one DVD, then I would get Volume 1.


http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EOS-7D-Controls-Introduction/dp/B002ZO578O/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1286331644& amp;sr=1-5


I have the Book and all 3 DVD's and I highly recommend them. You've made an enormous investment, so you might as well get the most out of it. If you do get these items, I would recommend to "read the book first" and then view the DVD's, this way you will get a lot more out of it.





Here's a free source form Canon:


http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetProductArticlesAct&amp;productID =329&amp;articleTypeID=5


Canon 7D Video Tutorials:


http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&amp;articleID=3167&am p;productID=329&amp;articleTypeID=48





Rich

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homer

I shoot a lot of eagles and I think this will serve me very well

---

Homer, I reread all the posts in this thread, I could not find there was anybody ever suggested you to get 70-200mm 2.8II or 70-200mm 2.8II+1.4TC for bird/wild life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homer

I am at the point in my life(Over 50) that nothing beats quaility and if it is in my buget to go for it

---

it's not about quality or money, homer, the 70-200mm2.8II is sure very nice, it's just not ideal for bird/wild life, because it is not long enough and maybe the AF is not fast enough(just guess, cause I never use it) and these two facts are very important for bird/wild life. in the given price range, I think 300mm 4.0, 400mm 5.6, 100-400mm and even a used 300mm 2.8 should be a better choice.


I know you are on fire now, if that's the way to learn, go for it, the good thing about buying a lens (good lens) is that if you don't like it later, you can always sell it for just a little lose.


happy buying and shooting, don't forget to post some pictures of eagles, I'm interesting to see them!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micktheexbiker

I think what im trying to say is live in the real world. I stopped chasing technology, buy used gear, save a fortune and dont need the %5 improvement this model has over the last. I dont print bigger than A3 so dont notice any differance in my lens choice from old to new. Will my human eye detect the differance between the new lens to old printed at A3? No.

---

[Y][Y][Y]


May I call you buddy, Mick?


however, only living in the real world is kind of boring. the fantasy would has a lot of fun. I like to live in the real world but go to the fantasy world once a while[:P]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

Homer, I reread all the posts in this thread, I could not find there was anybody ever suggested you to get 70-200mm 2.8II or 70-200mm 2.8II+1.4TC for bird/wild life.

---

I recommended the 70-200 f/2.8 II + 2X TC. It's the only weather sealed option, and the quality is still pretty good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

in the given price range, I think 300mm 4.0, 400mm 5.6, 100-400mm,and even a used 300mm 2.8 should be a better choice.

---

Well, none of those are weather sealed except the 300mm f/2.8, and none of them have the four-stop I.S. and other nice features of the 70-200. I think he made the right choice.



<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="content-type" />

OK, Daniel, I can't argue with you[:D]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

recommended the 70-200 f/2.8 II + 2X TC. It's the only weather sealed option, and the quality is still pretty good.

---

I have to say I didn't think about weather seal too much, if that's the priority, I'll agree with you. I would like to see the" pretty good" results from anybody in a constant basis from the 70-200 2.8II+2XTC combo, see if that will change my mind, the reason I say that is because I took some bird pictures with 7D,300mm2.8,2XTCII combo, I didn't like most of the pictures cause the IQ got degraded very much, they were not considered "pretty good " to me even for a web sized picture. here is the example. I used tripod to take this shot. I also found that this combo(300mm 2.8+2.0TC) can't effectively track fast moving birds(e.g. turns) because the 2XTC makes the speed of AF a lot slower. who care about weather seal if you can't even make the bird in focus? or constantly making low grade pictures?I want to say it again, 70-200mmII is very nice but it just not ideal for bird/wildlife, cause it's just too short and slower AF, at least I don't want to spent more then $2500 on a lens and TC that only make" pretty good "quality pictures[:(]


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/8561.DPP_5F00_00002.JPG[/img]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

and none of them have the four-stop I.S

---

I will agree with you too if this is another priority for bird/wild life, , but I don't think it is. shooting in field usually has lots of lights and you can always use flash or tripod to help. 400mm 5.6 has no IS, but it's a well-known lens for BIF. Nate has a lot of great bird pictures(not just BIF, and he always hand helding) took with this lens, I would hardly believe that the IQ from 70-2002.8II or with 2.0TC combo will be better than the IQ from 400mm 5.6 in a constant basis if we talking about bird/wildlife.


if weather seal and IS are not the priority, then what's the whole purpose of choosing version II over version I? the IQ right? isn't that the version I +400mm5.6 a lot better than version II+ TCII in the whole range of 70-400 if we talking about bird/wildlife for a given price range?


then again, I'm still very new in this photography thing, I don't mean to argue with you , please correct me if I'm wrong, Daniel , I'm willing to learn, thanks.


Damn, It's so late now, I'll be very sleepy tomorrow at work![:@]
















































<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homer

Took the plunge. Could not wait as fall is here and cannot miss all the fall colors and all theopportunities .

---

Hey Homer. Congrats. That is an awesome kit, and now (or later this week) you can be taking pictures rather than waiting to take pictures. In my mind, that is a verygood thing.


In addition to what you've already talked about, it looks like you dropped the 50 f1.4 prime and a circular polarized filter. If you can still swing it, the circular polarized filter would be great for "fall colors." Also, you mention a "lens cleaning kit." It is only ~$10, but I've really liked the "lens pen" that was recommended to me.


I am looking forward to seeing some of your pics. Vancouver Island is beautiful. My family used to vacation in Victoria and Tofino.


Brant

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homer

Currently I am in information overload reading thousand of reviews etc.

---

Sounds like you did some pretty good research and built a very nice kit here. But I would lke to offer you a couple of more things to talk about:


1. I have never heard anything good about the 2x extender. Though you cite the new one here, my guess is that it will be a little better than the current one, but still significantly damageing to IQ. I would suggest you consider the 1.4 extender instead of the 2X.


2. Dark cloudy days----wheres the tripod? Very very important. I never fully appreciated the IQ of my lenses until I started forcing myself to use a tripod----and a very good tripod is strongly suggested, even if you were to give up one of the lenses. Here is "something else" to add to your information overload bank: http://bythom.com/support.htm . Seriosly, my gitzo tripod did more to improve my photography than any of my lenses.


Good luck


Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

I took some bird pictures with 7D,300mm2.8,2XTCII combo, I didn't like most of the pictures cause the IQ got degraded very much, they were not considered "pretty good " to me even for a web sized picture.

---

I'm surprised to hear that. I've seen photos from the 300mm f/2.8 L IS with a 2X TC, another 2X TC, and a 1.4X TC (all stacked at once for shot of the moon) and the 100% crop (on a 5D, if I recall) *still* had contrast from pixel to pixel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

the 2XTC makes the speed of AF a lot slower.

---

That's true -- makes it less accurate, too. Also darkens the viewfinder and if you don't have IS it makes the viewfinder a lot more shakey. These effects will be smaller with the 1.4X that Homer ended up getting.


If you compare 2X TC versus cropping, on the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, the 2X TC wins for image quality by a mile. Not only does it have far more detail and contrast, but it will have less noise. For example:


70-200 IS II with 2X TC = 400mm f/5.6 1/250 ISO 6400


vs.


70-200 IS II with no TC = 200mm f/2.8 1/250 ISO 1600 (cropped to the same angle of view)


Some people would think that the ISO 1600 shot is going to have less noise than the ISO 6400 shot. In fact, the reverse is true! Less noise in low light is one of the advantages of the TC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

I would hardly believe that the IQ from 70-2002.8II or with 2.0TC combo will be better than the IQ from 400mm 5.6 in a constant basis if we talking about bird/wildlife.

---

Agreed. If we set aside weather sealing, and he got the 400mm f/5.6, then he could only use it when there's enough light for hand-holding speeds (at least 1/640 on the 7D, personally I would want over 1/1000). If he needs 1/2000 to get a tack-sharp photo on the 7D+400mm f/5.6, then he could use 1/125 or 1/250 with the 70-200.


If he got the 100-400, he would have to make do with the older 2-stop IS, miss the 70-100 range, and make do with worse quality/bokeh/autofocus in the 100-200 range. Wildlife is only 30% of what he's shooting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

if weather seal and IS are not the priority, then what's the whole purpose of choosing version II over version I? the IQ right?

---

Yes.



<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="content-type" />

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

isn't that the version I +400mm5.6 a lot better than version II+ TCII in the whole range of 70-400 if we talking about bird/wildlife for a given price range?

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Williams

1. I have never heard anything good about the 2x extender. Though you cite the new one here, my guess is that it will be a little better than the current one, but still significantly damageing to IQ.

---

I kindly disagree. Most people make flawed comparisons when it comes to TC: first they shoot with the TC, then they take it off and move closer to take a shot without the TC. The quality is definitely much higher if I move closer -- but that's not the time when I'm supposed to use TC. I'm supposed to use it when I can't move closer. In order to simulate this in a comparison, it's necessary to compare TC vs cropping. On a sharp lens like the 70-200 II, the 2X TC is definitely more detailed than cropping. Especially so if I correct the chromatic aberration in post.



<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="content-type" />

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Williams

I would suggest you consider the 1.4 extender instead of the 2X.

---

FWIW, he did end up getting the 1.4, though I still think the 2X is more useful for wildlife.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Williams

2. Dark cloudy days----wheres the tripod? Very very important.

---

Agreed.

Comments have been great and is why i chose to sign up only to this fourm, keep them coming. Always all quality comments and some of my decisions made were from posts reading many topicson this fourm.


I did not decide to get the 50mm asI wanted it for video but my first interestis learning to use the 7D asI did buy it for taking pictures. I will use what I saved to get a monopod and some decent books as suggested. No polarizer lens yet as adds a level of skill I know I am not ready for.


I plan to just use the 24-105 until I learn the basic/advanced7D functions andfeatures before I move on. Once I feel comfortable and getting some decent shots, will I change lenses. I am jumping in with both feet but don't want to drown myself.


I did want the EX2 II extender but from what I read most were not that impressed as they were with the EX1.4 II. Choices I saw were. wait for the reviiews of the new EX2III version and then decide or buy now at a reduced price a 1.4 that performed much better than the current 2.0 and the 1.4AF was also better. Both new versions sre supposed to have improvement in this. I bought the 1.4 now and will see in spring what the reviews say andthan buy a EX2 ?


2 more sleeps


Homer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

I'm surprised to hear that.

---

I have discussed 300mm 2.8+TCII here earlier, based on my experience, I found that the 2XTC maybe more useful for the effect of compressing than for getting more reach. sure I understand it's a subjective thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

If you compare 2X TC versus cropping,

---

I didn't compare that but It's really good to know that TCs are better than cropping( I knew I will learn something if you reply, in fact I have learned a lot from your posts, thanks)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

then he could use 1/125 or 1/250 with the 70-200.

---

I guess you are not talking about shooting birds right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

if weather seal and IS are not the priority, then what's the whole purpose of choosing version II over version I? the IQ right?

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

isn't that the version I +400mm5.6 a lot better than version II+ TCII in the whole range of 70-400 if we talking about bird/wildlife for a given price range?

---

Yes.














thanks Daniel, it's my pleasure to have you agree with me!


so the question is "is weather sealed that really important so you even want to loss that much IQ to get weather sealed?" I live in southern California, the weather here is just very nice, so maybe it's a big deal in Canada?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

I guess you are not talking about shooting birds right?

---

Well, that depends. If you accept a lower keeper rate, you can get some at 1/250. I've gotten a few at 1/60.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

I live in southern California, the weather here is just very nice, so maybe it's a big deal in Canada?

---

Last time I was in SoCal, there was a little rain and it almost caused a state of emergency. Panic-stricken news anchors on the verge of tears, widespread floods and panic, car wrecks everywhere caused by people who had never seen water fall from the sky.[:D] It rains like that all the time up here in the Pacific Northwest and beautiful British Columbia. You get beautiful photos just after a rainshower.


One time, a Californian moved up here and saw nothing but constant rain for two weeks straight. Finally she asked a little boy if it *ever* stopped raining. He said "how should I know? I'm only six."



<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="content-type" />

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

One time, a Californian moved up here and saw nothing but constant rain for two weeks straight. Finally she asked a little boy if it *ever* stopped raining. He said "how should I know? I'm only six."

---

lol, you know I kept talking about moving to Vancouver to my wife when we get retired, all I heard about this city is how beautiful it is especially when oriental cherry blooming and how great their seafood is, of course there are a lot of wildlife shooting opportunity, we may get a bigger nicer house there. now I have to think about that again!,I'm ok with the cold weather, but being stuck in house for 2 weeks or longer will kill me plus making all my gear weather sealed is very expensive![:D]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

One time, a Californian moved up here and saw nothing but constant rain for two weeks straight. Finally she asked a little boy if it *ever* stopped raining. He said "how should I know? I'm only six."

---

lol, you know I kept talking about moving to Vancouver to my wife when we get retired, all I heard about this city is how beautiful it is especially when oriental cherry blooming and how great their seafood is, of course there are a lot of wildlife shooting opportunity, we may get a bigger nicer house there. now I have to think about that again!,I'm ok with the cold weather, but being stuck in house for 2 weeks or longer will kill me plus making all my gear weather sealed is very expensive![img]/emoticons/emotion-2.gif[/img]
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

---

Stuck in the house? Nonsense. It's called a hood [:)]


Honestly though it's the lack of sunshine in the winter that seems to bother people who move here more than the rain. Rain is no big deal. - I'm really selling the place aren't I? [:P]


I've lived in Vancouver my entire life and I love the place. Maybe I'm just used to its downsides since i grew up with them. It's hardly ever too hot or too cold/wet to go outside. Also, when the weather is good, people really want to get out and enjoy it because they don't take it for granted. There's a lot of nature around and it's just a beautiful place. It's starting to sound like there are quite a few of us on the board located in Vancouver or elsewhere on the BC coast.


As to whether or not sealing is critical here, it really depends on the type of shooting. I've never relied on it, but then again I don't really like taking photos of rainy scenes, or walking around casually taking photos in the rain. Once it starts raining I stop taking photos, but I'm just a hobbyist so it's never critical for me to get a shot. My main casual walk around bag is a lowepro AW so the camera goes in and only comes back out when I get indoors or the rain breaks. However, Homer sounds like he's planning to get out in the rain for storms and wet weather, so prioritizing weather sealing makes sense to me. He's not going to be able to take great shots in the middle of a heavy rainstorm with the 100-400L for very long, certainly not the years that this amount of gear should last him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

One time, a Californian moved up here and saw nothing but constant rain for two weeks straight. Finally she asked a little boy if it *ever* stopped raining. He said "how should I know? I'm only six."

---

-------- Daniel, just too funny[:D]


I don`t plan to take pictures in the rain either. I live on the east coast of VI and 4 blocks from the beach. We get some good nasty storms and guess where I am,I alsoplan to make trips to the west coast (Long Beach) to get some storm shots this winter.This is the only time you will see me out in the rain is in storms and other times when it can`t be avoided.


Rain is a fact of life here but we are repaid with the beauty it provides and brings us. But no matter where you live, at certains times the weather just sucks.


Homer

WOW[:P] is all I can say. Simply amazing and having so much control is beyond believe.


Picked up everything on Friday, was late so only had time to charge the battery. Rained all day Saturday so gave me lots of time to read the manuals over and over againand go through everything I purchased,but did mange to take a couple pictures. Sunny today so managed to take a lot of pictures. I can't get over the quailty of the results. Only attaced the 24-105 so far .I filled the bird feeder and hung up the suet for the Wood Peckers so we will see what that brings.


I configured the camera by this link http://www.deepgreenphotography.com/blog/?p=226. Only setting I changed was to disable Live View for now. Not only did this help a lot, but also let me explore and dicover what is available in the menus. Reading the manual and then going through this setup really helped me understand whats going on. I am only shooting in JPEG mode so farand will use RAW when I learn some more. So far, all pictures I took were in AV mode and Auto ISO.


Question, what is the best site to upload and share pictures either apy site or free? Suggestions?


Thanks


Homer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homer

Question, what is the best site to upload and share pictures either apy site or free? Suggestions?

---

Homer, Many people use Flicker, It's Free and has a lot of options. There is also"Smug Mug" (Pay Site) that is popular and my favorite "Zenfolio" which is also a pay site. I prefer the pay sites because there are no ads and you can customize your site in many different ways. you can even get rid of the logos like zenfolio or smug mug so that the site really looks like your own. Also, you can set them up to sell your photos, have a back up site for your favorite shots, and limit someone else's ability to download your pictures. these sites also have very nice plugins for Lightroom, Aperture and Photoshop that allow direct conversion and upload. Finally, these sites make it very easy to upload your shots to this forum.


Good luck, when you do decide on a site, let us know so we can all take a gander [;)]


Bob

How much is Smug Mug or Zenfolio? I went to the Smug Mug site after reading your post, Bob and all it says is to try free. How much is that one after you "try"? I didn

Congrats on your new gear, Homer!! Very much looking forward to your photos! You did some extensive research here &amp; I know you will be very happy!


Denise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ddt0725

How much is Smug Mug or Zenfolio? I went to the Smug Mug site after reading your post, Bob and all it says is to try free. How much is that one after you "try"? I didn't check out the Zenfolio yet. I just dropped $25 to go Pro on Flickr for unlimited uploads. Guess I should have shopped around before I dropped the $.


Denise
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

---

Denise, I don't know what smug mug charges, but If I recall, Zenfolio charges 25, 50 or 100 depending on the level of service. You can see thier pricing here http://www.zenfolio.com/zf/pricing.aspx.

Opened a SmugMug free account to see how it works and feelsand uploaded my first pictures taken. Here is my link


http://pwilts.smugmug.com





Homer