1D MkIV vs 5D MkII

[Fast Glass]

I would get the longest lens you can afford for wildlife. You simplycannot haveenough focal length.Check this picture out, it was taken with my Minolta 600mm f/6.3 with a 2X extender and cropped about 25% and on a XTi!


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.86/_5F00_MG_5F00_4038-reduced.JPG[/img]


If you think you can shoot wildlife with a 1D IV or a 5D II without a long lens you will be GREATLY disopointed.


Johnl

[Freeday]

I have nothing but praise for the 5DMII, however, there is a shutter lag that would not be good for wildlife photography. I guess it just depends if you are taking action shots or not in my opinion.

[Brendan7]

but if I go with the 1.6x body then the 300/2.8 would effectively be a 480/2.8 with the option of extending that out to 672/4 with a 1.4x TC.

True, but if and when you upgrade to full frame you will have a plain 300/2.8 or 420/4. IF that is good enough for you, then run out tomorrow and get the 7D and 300/2.8. Many users have taken beautiful wildlife photographs with that lens. Combine that with the 70-200 you have and a 16-35, 24-105 or 10-22 and you are set!

Yes, the 500/4 would be nice

No. The 500/4 would be AWESOME![H]. When it comes to bird photography, the buck stops at the 500/f4. As a rule, get a longer, slower lens over a faster, shorter one. the 500 is much more expensive, so don't set your goals too high. But in general, the 7d and 300/2.8 will be a great combo for sports and wildlife. However, as shown by Fast Glass, you will want more focal length. If you get the 300/2.8 and upgrade to a full frame body, you will find yourself wanting a.... 500 f/4. (which BTW I can't afford)


[]brendan

[jaw]

Thanks guys! I already have the 17-40/4, 24-105/4, 70-200/4, all L series. If I went for the 500/4 I suppose I should get the 300/4 to round out the kit! But in all seriousness, if I got the 7D I think the lower light capabilities of the 300/2.8 would be nice to have, plus it gives me the equivalent reach of a 500/4 on a FF. If in the future I can afford a 1Ds, I would probably also be in a position to afford some big glass like the 500/4 as well.....having the option of a 300/2.8 and 500/4 in the future sounds good [H]

[Brendan7]

I think the lower light capabilities of the 300/2.8 would be nice to have

Great! that solves that. Get the 7D and the 300/2.8. You will be SO happy with that.


brendan[]

[HiFiGuy1]

jaw,


BTW, I didn't notice where you said what body you already have. What are you shooting now?

[jaw]

Thanks everyone for making my decision easier. This morning I bought the 7D body for the equivalent of $1600, and also ordered the 300/2.8, but have to wait 2 - 3 months for that apparently. []

[Brendan7]

Thanks everyone for making my decision easier. This morning I bought the 7D body for the equivalent of $1600, and also ordered the 300/2.8, but have to wait 2 - 3 months for that apparently. [img]/emoticons/emotion-2.gif[/img]

Congratulations! Good luck with that stuff!

[Daniel Browning]

Thanks everyone for making my decision easier. This morning I bought the 7D body for the equivalent of $1600, and also ordered the 300/2.8

Excellent! I think you made the best choice. I'm sure you will be stunned by the photos.

[SupraSonic]

Have Xtra $$$ invest 1Ds MKIII/IV instead.