Advice sought from Canon shooters only ..... (Page 2): Bob, tell us EXACTLY what and how you will be using both pieces of equipment. ;-) SS...

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Bob Yankle wrote:

Background: I currently own a Canon 7D and a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM lens (and just incidentally, a Canon SX60 HS thrown into the mix as well as a Canon 5D MK III).

I can justify upgrading one or the other, but not both. The upgrade will probably happen in mid-2015.

So...... should I get the Canon 7D MK II or the new Canon 100-400mm L series lens?

Bob, tell us EXACTLY what and how you will be using both pieces of equipment. ;-)
SS

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

dugole wrote:

Bob - Wow! That's a tough question. I think the ... (show quote)

Thanks dugole. I always appreciate hearing from someone who has been where I am now. I'm not a video guy (yet), but have learned never to say never in that regard .... the one video I shot of my daughter singing in church with the Canon 5D MK III and a Canon 24-105mm f/4L lens blew me a way - she was backlit and in ambient light but since I knew how to handle those situations as a photographer, I was way ahead of the game. It turned out very well.

Yeah, I thought of putting the Tamron 150-600mm lens in the mix, but have come to the realization I don't need that much reach for the types of events that I shoot.

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

SharpShooter wrote:

Bob, tell us EXACTLY what and how you will be using both pieces of equipment. ;-)
SS

Nope. I need others thought's and observations, not a cross-examination. Besides, I've already left those hints in my comments above.

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

BigBear wrote:

Are you wanting to trade your 5D mk III for an EF 100-400 IS L lense??

Lets make a deal !!

Don't you WISH Bigbear? No, the 5D MK III stays right where it is. And the lens I'm looking at is the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM model, not the current one.

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

St3v3M wrote:

Oh ya, my Canon EOS 7D goes everywhere with me!

Fantastic! A man after my own heart! Good on ya Mate!

Just curious ..... are you tempted by either of those new pieces of equipment?

BigBear Loc: Northern CT

Bob Yankle wrote:

Don't you WISH Bigbear? No, the 5D MK III stays right where it is. And the lens I'm looking at is the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM model, not the current one.

I figured no deal ..
I have the first model EF 100-400 L IS. It's my wife's primary lens. The new model has internal rotating zoom as opposed to the slide zoom that I have.

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

BigBear wrote:

I figured no deal ..
I have the first model EF 100-400 L IS. It's my wife's primary lens. The new model has internal rotating zoom as opposed to the slide zoom that I have.

Yep! The new one ...... now THAT's what I'm talking about! It just bothers me that a single lens would cost more than a new 7D MK II body by about $500.00

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

Bob Yankle wrote:

Fantastic! A man after my own heart! Good on ya Mate!

Just curious ..... are you tempted by either of those new pieces of equipment?

I would trade my 7D for the Mark II, but do I need it?

My son's off to college soon so right now it's need versus want

Longhorn Loc: Austin, Texas

I have the 7DII on order. I now have the 100-400mmL and the Tamron 150-600mm lens. I find the Tamron is too heavy for me to hand-hold for any length of time. When I receive my 7DII, I intend to trade the 100-400L Canon and the Tamron in on the new 100-400LII and a1.4 tele converter. I can easily hand-hold that equipment and have the posibility of ordering the 2.0 tele converter if I need more reach.

BigBear Loc: Northern CT

Bob Yankle wrote:

Yep! The new one ...... now THAT's what I'm talking about! It just bothers me that a single lens would cost more than a new 7D MK II body by about $500.00

All of my lenses cost more than the body I shoot with.
My last upgrade will be to a 5D mk iii when I find one that I can afford.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

Bob Yankle wrote:

Yep! The new one ...... now THAT's what I'm talking about! It just bothers me that a single lens would cost more than a new 7D MK II body by about $500.00

I'm considering selling my 70-300L for the new 100-400L now that Canon has done away with the slider. I'm also considering the new Sigma 150-600. It looks to be a sweet lens. Even if you don't need all of that reach I'm sure it would be nice to have at times. For less money. I'm in no hurry so I am waiting for user reviews to start coming in before I decide.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Oh, the anguish of decisions.
Get the lens, then the body will be outclassed by the lens and you will have an argument for a body upgrade.

Bob Yankle wrote:

Background: I currently own a Canon 7D and a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM lens (and just incidentally, a Canon SX60 HS thrown into the mix as well as a Canon 5D MK III).

I can justify upgrading one or the other, but not both. The upgrade will probably happen in mid-2015.

So...... should I get the Canon 7D MK II or the new Canon 100-400mm L series lens?

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Longhorn wrote:

I have the 7DII on order. I now have the 100-400mmL and the Tamron 150-600mm lens. I find the Tamron is too heavy for me to hand-hold for any length of time. When I receive my 7DII, I intend to trade the 100-400L Canon and the Tamron in on the new 100-400LII and a1.4 tele converter. I can easily hand-hold that equipment and have the posibility of ordering the 2.0 tele converter if I need more reach.

Longhorn, keep in mind that you won't get AF with the 2x on the 100-400!
SS

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

St3v3M wrote:

I would trade my 7D for the Mark II, but do I need it?

My son's off to college soon so right now it's need versus want

I'm almost in the same predicament St3v3M. I'm retired now, and no longer have access to the big bucks of my working days. I think I'm almost at the point where I must learn to live with what I've got now .... and those are no slouches. In the past, I have sold my gear on Amazon.com and gotten a very small return on investment, but still enough to shave a little off full price. Of the two choices, I'm more interested in the lens than the new camera body.

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

LFingar wrote:

I'm considering selling my 70-300L for the new 100-400L now that Canon has done away with the slider. I'm also considering the new Sigma 150-600. It looks to be a sweet lens. Even if you don't need all of that reach I'm sure it would be nice to have at times. For less money. I'm in no hurry so I am waiting for user reviews to start coming in before I decide.

LFinger, you hit the nail on the head. I'm in no hurry and have the luxury of taking the long view on my next purchase.