1D Mark IV or new 70-200

[JJphoto]

Since you have a lot of nice glass already, you should definitely get the Mk IV

100% agreed


both 1D IV and 70-200mm2.8 II are good stuff with a overpriced tag IMHO, it's a money issue, like HD has said, maybe the only one can answer your question is yourself.


thanks for wasting our time[](just kidding)

[HDNitehawk]

, the only other parameter that I would like to see you add to your evaluation would be to include moving subjects, as well as stationary ones, because as you are aware, that is certainly where the 7D and the MkIV really shine, as compared to the 5D.

On those issues I believed it to be an obvious given that the 7D and the 1D MK IV would be superior to the 5D Mark II with moving objects. I was trying to find out if I would loose any image quality by switching, since with wildlife usualy I was having to crop a lot of the time with the 5D.


I bought the 7D in November, I am not convinced yet it is more accurate than the 5D Mark II on stationary subjects yet. On the tests with lensalign I have done with both cameras and the 500mm the 5D is more accurate. I plan on only using the 7D on the 500mm so I couldn't speak to its accuracy on other lenses. In the field its hard to compare, but it doesn't seem like my keeper rate has improved.


I have not seen any comparisons from any one that would say the 1D Mark IV is the better wildlife camera, or that the 7D is better because of the crop factor (or whatever other reason). That is why sometimes I wonder if I should have went to the 1D Mark IV instead of the 7D.

[Fast Glass]

or the use of 1.4x extender which will cause you to lose an f-stop,

If you have the same DOF you have the same noise if sensor technology is the same, which in this case it's not. The 1D IV has andnewer sensor and have better noise for the same DOF. Using a extender or croppingresults in the same DOF, wether you are using an extender or cropping you will lose just as much light. You don't quite lose one stop of light with a 1.4X extender, a 1.5X extenderwould be exactally one stop. You lose 1.4 times worth of light, you lose 1.6 times of light, you 2 times worth of light. Don't look at conversion factors only when deciding between cameras, noise and reach.


John.

[Richard Lane]

Thanks for the response John (Fast Glass), but perhaps I wasn't clear. I wasn't trying to compare using an extender vs. cropping, I was referring to the additional expense that might be incurred by requiring a 400mm f/2.8 with the MKIV, as opposed to a300mm f/2.8 + 1.4X extender on the MKIV which would cause a loss of one f-stop, as well as slower AF by 50% in the latter scenario.


When I put my 1.4X extender on my 300mm f/2.8L, it becomes a 420mm f/4, so I lost one f-stop on the same camera. The aperture is now one stop smaller and my speed is one stop slower. That's what I was trying to imply.


Rich

[Fast Glass]

HiRich,


The7D was supposed to have a advantage in reach and noise because you loose one stop with an extender with the same lens in your preivious post.A 400mm f/2.8has more reach at the same apetureas the 300mm f/2.8. My point was that the 1D IV has the advantage in noise/reach. I was in a hurry when Ityped that postand I should have noted cropped whether with a 1.6 crop camera or in the post.


The intonation of this post sounds like I am anoyed, I am not at all. Please don't take it that way.


Cheers[],


John.

[Richard Lane]

Hi John,


Thanks for the clarification, however I did not take it that way at all, as I always enjoy reading about your technical side of things.


Cheers,


Rich