RRS Loc: Not sure

Mine too but you could buy 3 of the 100-400 lenses for just the price of one 300mmf/2.8!

Lupane Loc: Gainsville, Ga.

FWIW, having both, the 100-400L ii and the 1.4x iii; it is an amazing combination out in the Sun. I am sure that this combination outperforms the Sigma since my best friend owns the Sigma. We both shoot with a 7D ii. As far as being indoors, I never had the need to use the extender. The combination becomes 224-896 with 7Dii and in good sunlight the pictures are stupendous. In price it amounts to $2525 vs $1799. It is up to the person to decide.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

No contest ! You will want the focus speed and accuracy of the Canon 100-400 bare lens - assuming you do a proper micro focus adjust. Forget the 1.4X and use well applied pixel enlarging techniques/software if needed.

You will also want the maneuverability and mobility ( lighter weight) of the Canon.

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

I had a bad experience with a Sigma lens and never went back to them. I'd recommend the Canon - made for Canon gear.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

:thumbup: :thumbup:

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

:thumbup: :thumbup:

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

The 6D is not a sports/wildlife camera. The 7D II is. Nuff said.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

In general that is true. Modify it to the 7DII is much better/easier to use as a sport/wildlife camera. I own both and after practice I have gotten some very good birds and BIF with my 6D. I went back to the old fashioned way, manual mode, preset everything, wait for the bird to be at the right distance (sometimes I use center point focus and track with a gimbal head).

My ideal bird camera would be a combo of the 7DII AF and other features with the 6D's sensor, maybe a new Mk II higher megapixel 6D sensor. Then I would need to win the lotto to afford one.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

Quite true, but only in the context of today's cameras. Compare the 6D with many of the very successful sport/action cameras of years past, with their very basic AF, if they even had AF, and frame rate, and you could definitely call it a sports camera. It will definitely shoot sports/wildlife, but you just have to work harder at it. I think many of us have gotten a bit spoiled. I know I have. If I go to shoot my nephew's soccer game the 6D stays on the shelf and I take the 7DII.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Isn't it amazing how all those great sports/action/wildlife/bird shots got taken in the days of film and all manual controls.
They had to really work at it.

Fantasy, get a time machine and a truck load of modern Canons, Nikons etc.* and go back to about 1969 (I got home from Nam, good year to pick.) and walk into the Nat Geo offices on a day a big bunch of their staff photogs are having a meeting.
Give a demo of the gear and ask who wants one. Might help if you wear a suit of armor for your own protection. Getting trampled hurts.

Then repeat at Sports Illustrated etc.

*Take one computer and printer for each camera, plenty of ink, lots of batteries and chargers.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

Amazing! Great minds must think alike! In the spring of '69 while heading back to 'Nam for my 2nd tour I spent a couple of days in Japan. Went to a seaside park in Yokohama one afternoon with my Yashica TL Super SLR. A group of about a dozen US models was in the park, posing in various settings for a horde of photographers. I followed them around like a dog in heat, but feeling quite inferior with my one camera and lens and them with all their pro gear. I've occasionally fantasized about teleporting back there with a backpack full of modern gear, including a laptop with photoshop and a portable printer! Talk about blowing everyone's mind!
One note: The models were professionals being moved around the park by an organizer of some kind and had the total attention of the Japanese photographers. Another GI was in the park with his wife and young son. They were African-American and she was quite beautiful. When the photographers spotted her they abandoned the models and surrounded the family for probably 10 minutes taking shots. Primarily of her. The ole motor drives were a whirring! It was like they had never seen a black person before, although I am sure they had with all the US presence in Japan. They graciously posed for a while then went on their way.
So, want to build a time machine and have some fun? Besides, I could use it to go back and warn myself about certain females I have known! :lol:

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Better yet a list of stocks or real estate values and money to invest.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

That is my time machine.
Work as a janitor at the very beginning for Bill Gates and take my pay in stock

RRS Loc: Not sure

Lets go back a little farther to 1963 and buy about 12 Corvettes. If I remember about $6,000.00 each and that was all the money in the world to me at that time.

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

You might be a little bit high in your pricing of 1963 Corvettes. But, we were discussing the newer version of the Canon 100-400mm lens and we all know the trading price for the lens. I am reading the critiques here and some are being too harsh with the 2x T/C. I'm not getting too many problems with either TC and the newer version of the lens. Been shooting it and either T/C for the last 3 weeks and don't have any problems. I find the 1.4 T/C to be almost required to make the lens reach it's maximum capabilities. I was able to shoot an afternoon's worth of the EF 200-400mm f/4.0L w 1.4 T/c last fall. The 100-400 with the 1.4 t/c reminds me of the bigger lens. Both lenses seem to be as comfortable with the T/C as without it. The T/C should be included in version III of the 100-400. The top 2 shots are @ 800mm, the bottom is 540mm.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)