Need lens advice for Canon 7D mk ii (Page 2): Jen, a few answers and my own perspective. The mkl takes an extender very well. The focus with a 1.4x is a function of the camera, not the...

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

jenz wrote:

I enjoyed the 100-400 push pull very much when I rented it for a trip to Lake Tahoe. Back then I wasnât really sure where my focus was- pun intended. Over the last year wildlife has been the thing.

How does a 1.4 extender work with the first version?

Jen, a few answers and my own perspective.
The mkl takes an extender very well. The focus with a 1.4x is a function of the camera, not the lens.
Most that tell you bad things about a mkl have not owned one.
A non-zoom for BIF is a very tough proposition. In a very narrow Field of View you have to locate a moving bird, that's almost impossible to do before a bird is just the tail end view if at all. With the zoon, you put the bird in your view then simply zoom in. If you loose it, just zoom back, locate, and zoon in again. The mkl was designed for that. The push/pull is intuitive for that!
Is it sharp enough? NO lens will EVER be long enough or sharp enough for birds. You have to WORK for a bird shot, it's NOT the lens.
You know the lens, you've used one. is sharp enough? Is this sharp enough? Sharpness is more about good light and being close enough.
SS

(Download)

crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada

rmorrison1116 wrote:

Take a look at the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary. I have one and it's actually a decent lens and a new one is well within your budget.

Same.
Happy with it.
Tammy G2 version is better but for more money. Sigma sport is not worth the extra money imho.

AF is lightning fast on my 5Dmiv and 70D...and accurate. That is key for sports/BIF.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

KEH has a selection of options for the original 100-400L priced around $1000. I liked that lens a lot as did many others. I'd take the Canon model over any of the 3rd party options prices around the cost.

But, the II version is one of those upgrades where the newer version is really worth the expense / investment. KEH has a used v II at $1900.

billnourse Loc: Bloomfield, NM

rmorrison1116 wrote:

Take a look at the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary. I have one and it's actually a decent lens and a new one is well within your budget.

My sister just got this lens for Christmas for her Nikon 810. She does a lot of birding and really likes it.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

SharpShooter wrote:

Jen, a few answers and my own perspective. br The ... (show quote)

Nice shot of the cyclists. Cycling is big in my area. Those bikes ain't cheap either.

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, Colorado

jenz wrote:

thank you, I’m going to check out the link. Appreciate the help.

I struggle with GAS and need to keep my wants in perspective with my skill level.

You are welcome Jen, and forgive me for not welcoming you to the forum. WELCOME! Here is a review of the Tamron 100-400 I previously suggested to you regarding your amateur status and budget. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-100-400mm-f-4.5-6.3-Di-VC-USD-Lens.aspx and I realize this probably won't sit well with the pro's (and wanna be's) but I like you, do have a budget for my hobby since I don't have deep pockets, or was born with a silver spoon in my mouth. There are many 3rd party lens vendors who produce excellent products that appeal to amateurs and advanced photographers at 1/3 the price of a 'white lens'. I have Canon, as well as Sigma and Tamron lenses which all do exactly what I want them to do when I capture an image for the price I can afford.. I am fortunate in that I belong to a camera club where we swap lenses on a shoot and can get first hand experience as to a prospective lenses capabilities without the cost of renting. When I purchase a new/used lens I research it to death looking at all options and specifications without regard to brand name. I need the most bang for my buck.

Best of luck in your quest.
Michael

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

mas24 wrote:

Those bikes ain't cheap either.

Tell me about it....., they cost almost as much as cameras!!!!!

SS

jenz Loc: Whittier, CA

Your cyclist shot is beautiful!

You touched on what was rattling in my head, in that technique has so much more to do with sharpness than just the lens. Working for the photo is half the challenge and one I don’t mind at all. I get that good glass matters, but also understand that regardless of the price, if my technique is garbage, then my photos will be less than stellar.

Thank you for your thoughtful response and for engaging me to really think about this.

jenz Loc: Whittier, CA

Thanks Michael,

I was joking with my parents a few days ago about being upset that I wasn’t a trust fund baby.

It’s a struggle to balance the wants and needs, especially at my level. If I were a pro, then I could justify the expense.

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

jenz wrote:

Hi all,

I need help with choosing a lens. Looking to shoot BIF on Canon 7D mk ii. I’m an amateur.

The canon 100-400 ii seems to be the way to go, but I can’t justify the cost for what I do.

Looking to spend around 1,”00.00 and am open to used gear.

Guidance is much appreciated.

Hi jenz and welcome to Hog-Heaven. As an amateur you still want top quality, do you not? In keeping with your goal you have a few choices. !) Raise your ante and spend more money for the v. II of the 100-400 Canon. 2) Spend endless hours scouring the web sites of Adorama, B&H, and KEH looking for v. I of the 100-400, or 3) lower your objective to the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM Canon and shoot the hell out of it. Save your pennies and buy a 2.0 T.C. sometime later. Any of these options will offer top quality equipment that will last for a long time and give you the image quality you desire. Good luck to you in whichever you decide. You haven't mentioned a most important piece of equipment that you will probably want in the near future-the tripod! Guidance? MT Shooter at The Camera Cottage in Billing MT. He's a member here also. Cheers

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

jenz wrote:

I enjoyed the 100-400 push pull very much when I rented it for a trip to Lake Tahoe. Back then I wasnât really sure where my focus was- pun intended. Over the last year wildlife has been the thing.

How does a 1.4 extender work with the first version?

I had a 100-400 mk 1 and used it with a 1.4x III. Excellent results. I am now using the same extender with my 100-400 mk 2.
Oh, I don't have my 7DII anymore, I traded my 6D, 7DII, 100-400 mk 1, Tamron 150-600 (first gen) and some other stuff when I upgraded my FF to a 5DIV. I did get an 80D from Canon refurbished for my birds. (newer sensor and 27 f/8 AF focal points instead of the 1 on the 7DII).

You might consider the Tamron 150-600 G2.

And consider a screw on pistol grip mounted on the tripod collar for hand holding (I use a nest gimbal head when on tripod.) and a Red Dot sight mounted on the flash shoe. You can keep both eyes open for finding/following the birds.

Extender not on, but...
Extender not on, but......

(Download)

jenz Loc: Whittier, CA

The 70-200 2.8 is an option i tossed around for a bit as well, but the only thing I wasn’t sure of is the reach with the converter. I’ve never used a converter before, so there’s a little hesitancy on my part.

The options you listed are definitely what I’m going through now. I want a good lens that will last. Forking over the extra cash for the 100-400 vii is doable and I want it, but thing thing that stops me is my learning curve. I know I won’t regret buying the lens, but am trying to explore other options to keep things in perspective.

I have a tripod and have used it a bit but am still learning how to navigate that as well. Mine converts to a monopod, which is convenient.

Guess it’s good to be in a place where considering a new lens is an option.

Dixiegirl Loc: Alabama gulf coast

jenz wrote:

Thanks Donna. Do you use a tripod/monopod when you’re shooting wildlife with this lens? When I rented it, I used it handheld- and had some good results. Since then the tripods on my bag mos of the time but I’ve not rented the lens again.

I don't alwyas use a tripod, Jenz, but I do almost always use something to prop the lens even if it's just my knees. lol

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

jenz wrote:

Hi all,

I need help with choosing a lens. Looking to shoot BIF on Canon 7D mk ii. I’m an amateur.

The canon 100-400 ii seems to be the way to go, but I can’t justify the cost for what I do.

Looking to spend around 1,”00.00 and am open to used gear.

Guidance is much appreciated.

Personally I would try to save for the Canon or consider a used one, still more than you have budgeted, I purchased one here on the Hog used and totally love it. I think that the advantages of the Canon vs third party is that it is made to pair with your camera and the focusing systems are well matched. BIF requires fast and accurate autofocus.

sergio

Depends on what you photograph. For birds Tamron 150-600 is best. For anything else I would use a shorter zoom.
And probably the best advice: sell the 7D and buy a Sony RX10 iv.
I have all of these (7DII, lots of lenses including the Canon 100-400, the Sony RX10 iv etc) and unless you need more than 600mm focal length the Sony is what everyone should buy.
Attached is a picture of yesterday with Sony and the zoom at 600mm.