Advice sought from Canon shooters only ..... (Page 6): Wish I hadn't asked. I can't afford it right now even at that price. :cry:...

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Gifted One wrote:

Adorama and they have a unadvertised special for $1599 for the body only. Only available through phone orders not online. Not sure how long it will last but as of 1:30 pm EST it was still on. free overnight shipping, and extended 2 year warrantee with drops and spills coverage, but only if you ask.

J. R.

I believe that there will also be promotions on the Mark 2 m lens.

Wish I hadn't asked. I can't afford it right now even at that price. :cry:

Gifted One Loc: S. E. Idaho

dsmeltz wrote:

Wish I hadn't asked. I can't afford it right now even at that price. :cry:

Don't feel alone. And I PMed bob about this but perhaps I would really just say to bank funds. Looks like a good kit you are carrying. I passed a several upgrades and am looking at slimming down and or adding a FF system. Lots of choices. J. R.

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Have not read reviews on lens, but after looking at the 7DII would probably go with new 100-400 lens.

erickter Loc: Dallas,TX

gregoryd45 wrote:

If your idea is that you want more reach, get a 1.4X, and keep what you have and your problem is solved. Look at Swamp Gator's posts, he get fantastic results from that set up. If you just want something new flip a coin. You can't go wrong with either

Does the canon 1.4x work on the 70-300L? I have that lens too, and made a post looking for extenders. Kept running into comments and research that stated the rear glass on the 70-300L collides with the 1.4x. At least the one by Canon.

Gifted One Loc: S. E. Idaho

I would check with Canon tech. They can give you the answer. Also to make it so the rear element does not hit - if in fact it does you could use a n extension tube. I saw one of the Canon pros use of it. J. R.

erickter wrote:

Does the canon 1.4x work on the 70-300L? I have that lens too, and made a post looking for extenders. Kept running into comments and research that stated the rear glass on the 70-300L collides with the 1.4x. At least the one by Canon.

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

Large number of issues arrising with the 7Dmk11 - search this site and then think about it again
just saying

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

teacherdad48 wrote:

Why not get a 6D and try full frame? I did and will never go back!

because the OP already has a 5DMk3!

ecar Loc: Oregon, USA

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?

I have the exact same issue, except I sold my SX50 and am eyeing the 28-300 L.

Personally, I think you should have both a fast crop frame (7d or 7d ii) for your general pic's AND the 5D III FF for what you need to take your better photos.

I don't know what you have for lenses, but the 7d gives you the added zoom you need, so I'd say upgrade to the 7d II. It's a camera that should be in you bag. Save the 100-400 for down the road.

davidk2020 Loc: San Diego

Bob Yankle wrote:

Yep lightcatcher, I've always liked the results of what I'd seen with the Canon 100-400 but shied away from it in the past because I didn't like the idea of a push-pull lens. The newly designed lens has me all excited ..... I can't wait to try one out when they arrive in the local camera shop.

I just do not understand all the hate for the push zoom. I have the 100-400 and it did take a little getting used to, but it's one of my favorite lenses to use.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

No, 1.4X won't work on 70-300... Canon TC won't even work. Anyone else's, auto focus will fail. Besides, OP says he's tried a Kenko 1.4X on it and the image quality takes a heavy hit.

If it were me, I'd get the lens. It sounds as if that would be the most useful thing, at this time. 7DII sounds as if it's going to be a great camera, but the original 7D is no slouch either. I'm still using two of them, tho I'll be replacing them with 7DIIs eventually.

People seem to either love or hate push/pull zooms. There doesn't seem to be a lot of in between. I'm not a fan of them, personally. But I know others who really like the original 100-400mm. The new Mark II also looks to be a step up in image quality... and more usable with teleconverters, should that be a concern.

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?

Ok Bob, let me chime in.
Bob, it's never about what I like and don't like. It's strictly about what will get me more keepers. I use what I like and adapt to what I don't.
I would get the camera. The new camera will get you way more keepers than the lens, no matter how much sharper the new lens is, and it's not going to be much. The biggest advantage is a better IS.
The 100-400 with an extender will AF on the 5lll to get you 560mm at f8.
The 70-300 will give you just 80mm less at 480mm on either 7d/7ll.
If you get a used 100-400 on the 7d will give you 640mm at 5.6, a full stop faster.
I would get the used/old 100-400 and the new camera. If you add the extender to the new camera, you will have 900mm @ f8 and still get AF.
That would give you the best keeper rate and bang for the buck and with little or no cropping. And keepers matters WAY more than the gear.
As you already know, the 70-300 will not take the 1.4x.
Good luck Bob. ;-)
SS
PS,I just hope I didn't screw up the numbers! :lol:

raymondh Loc: Walker, MI

A tough one for sure, but the 7DII has really got my attention.

jefflantzimages Loc: Seattle

go for the best glass you can get. i have all the lens you do except the 100-400. my favorites though are my Zeiss lens'. i did not want to spend the money on the 2 Canon cameras you mentioned since i love my 5D11 and my 60D and i would prefer buying exceptional glass.

Brooklyn-Camera Loc: Brooklyn, New York City

What are you shooting? Who are you shooting? Just received the 7D mark II and I'll test it out Saturday night shooting a football game with crappy lighting. Lets see how this high ISO works out. I'll post you pics as soon as I can. Don't laugh but my computers OS is XP and is not supported by Canon software. It was OK with the Canon T-3 1100D but NG with the mark II.
So as soon as Edit I'll post the best and worst of my shots for you to judge. LightRoom can't handle RAW from the mark II yet so they will be JEPEG's.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

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?

I think I would got for the 100-400 (glass is always the stuff that excites me the most). I had the old version and was not all that impressed so I went with the prime, but this one seem to be a winner in every which way, and you can always get the 7D M II at a later point.