Quote Originally Posted by Ajohnson


I agree on your choice of lenses. I use the 24-105 f/4L IS, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 16-35 f/2.8L, 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS & 600 f/4L. I find all of these lenses work great because I love landscape & wildlife photography. I use a CanonMark III & the 5D.I also keep a 1.25x converter in my bag. Keep up the good work. BestRegards.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>


Now, that's quite a bag! Does it come with its own forklift? []
  • 24-105: 1.5 lb
  • 70-200 f/2.8L IS: 3.5 lb w/collar
  • 16-35: 1.4 lb
  • 100-400: 3 lb (I think that's without the collar &amp; hood)
  • 600: 11.8 lb
  • Mark III (1D or 1Ds?): 2.6 lb
  • 5D: 2 lb (without the grip)
  • 1.25x converter (not sure what you have--is it the Canon 1.4x extender?): 0.5 lb



That's a total of 26.3 lb, not including the bag (though I have trouble figuring out what bag could carry all that); batteries; tripod (you're not going to be handholding the 600mm very much) and ballhead or gimbal head (or monopod); maybe a flash + bracket + Better Beamer, etc.


What about tiny things? None of those lenses is especially good in terms of maximum magnification. The 24-105 would be the best on its own at 1/4.3x or the 70-200mm with the 1.4x extender (about 1/3.3x). One way to add macro capability (besides carrying another lens!) would be the 77mm Canon 500D close-up lens. It would work with the 24-105 (at the upper end of its range), 70-200, and 100-400. Extension tubes are another approach that would also reduce the minimum focusing distance. (Bird photographers apparently like to use an extension tube with the 500mm or 600mm lens for small birds closer in.)