• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

new set up advise 300 or 400 5d or 7d? (1 Viewer)

Brian2

Brian2

Well-known member
Guys
I'm planning on a small investment in the near future.
Currently I carry a Nikon D50 and Sigma 80-300 lens. But as with everything else the time comes to invest in better equipment. I want a camera and lens set up I can carry (hand hold) and I'm considering switching to Canon with a budget for camera and lens around 2k
I've had some advise saying get the 300mm and a 1.4convertot kit with the 7d
and other advise saying to get the 400 f4 fixed focus with the 5d
anybody got any thoughts that might help me make my choice when D day comes. B :)
 
The 400 F4? and 5D will be no good for what you want to photograph. My self and a few others on here get along nicely with a 7D and 400 5.6.
 
Paul Jarvis said:
The 400 F4? and 5D will be no good for what you want to photograph. My self and a few others on here get along nicely with a 7D and 400 5.6.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't the 5D/400 f4 be any good? I can't imagine that the op would be able to get that for the budget as the 400 f4 goes for £3.5k+ secondhand.
 
A massive difference in price between the 400/4 and 300/4 Brian as has already been indicated by 'postcardcv' above. Are you sure you do not mean the 400/5.6?
 
Yes I do mean 5.6 sorry (wish I had the money for the F4)
Just hear some say 300 with the 1.4 is better than the 400 f5.6 and others say the 100-400 is better than the straight 400.
Then I also get into the camera differences and I just find myself confused and in need of all the advise I can get to make the right choice.
To add more confusion I was out at the weekend and a fellow birder through the Nikon D600 in the mix as a good camera but lower cost than
5D and 7D
Lot's more homework to be done i think and I'm going to give a little digiscoping a go while I research cameras and lenses a little more.
thanks for the input thus far.
 
The 100-400 vs 400 f5.6 vs 300 + tc debate rumbles on all the time. Having owned all three in the past I would say that any of them are very good options and all can give great results. The 400 prime is probably the fastest focusing, the 300 has the best close focus making it great for butterflies and can used without the tc in low light situations, the 100-400 is the best all rounder and the one that I finally settled on. As for cameras the 7D might be the obvious option for a birding camera, good AF, good IQ and plenty of pixels on the bird. The 5D series give superb image quality but unless you go for the mkIII the AF will not be as good as the 7D.
 
The typical 3 options 300f4 with 1.4X, 100-400 and 400f5.6 are discussed all the time. The is no clear winner for all situations. Each has some unique advantages.

300f4 - closest focusing
100-400 - most focal length versatility
400f5.6 - best options for birds in flight

However any one of the three can produce world class photos in the right hands.

Oops, I guess postardcv beat me to it.
 
postcardcv said:
Why wouldn't the 5D/400 f4 be any good? I can't imagine that the op would be able to get that for the budget as the 400 f4 goes for £3.5k+ secondhand.
Click to expand...

Pete the older carnations of the 5d have low fps so for birds and wildlife I wouldnt have thought it would be the right camera for the op. As you pointed out the 400 F4 goes for more than the ops budget, and has now said it was a typo error.

So I think the realistic options are 7D as stated, maybe s/h 40d or 50d and one of the lens choices mentioned.
 
postcardcv said:
The 100-400 vs 400 f5.6 vs 300 + tc debate rumbles on all the time. Having owned all three in the past I would say that any of them are very good options and all can give great results. The 400 prime is probably the fastest focusing, the 300 has the best close focus making it great for butterflies and can used without the tc in low light situations, the 100-400 is the best all rounder and the one that I finally settled on. As for cameras the 7D might be the obvious option for a birding camera, good AF, good IQ and plenty of pixels on the bird. The 5D series give superb image quality but unless you go for the mkIII the AF will not be as good as the 7D.
Click to expand...

Perfectly summed up.

I use the 7D 400mm f5.6 combo but miss the close focus, I.S. & versatility of the 100-400.
 
Last edited:
Great advise guys which is much appreciated.
Sounds like the 7D with the 400 f5.6 is the front runner and like most have said any combo on my want list will bring decent results (assuming I have the ability to use it)
I just need to think about it a little longer as I do like to switch to Butterflies in mid year when birding gets a little quieter so perhaps the 300 might work out better for me.

thanks again, It's great to be able to ask those using the gear for feedback like this.
I guess I may need to adjust the budget a touch.
 
I'd go with 7d plus 100-400 for versatility and a £250-£400 bridge camera (SX40/50 FZ150/200) next Spring (ie. a new financial year!!) for Butterflies and insects.
Russ
 
You'll certainly not regret the &D + 400mm 5.6 combo. Light, focuses very fast and relatively affordable. Further, bear in mind that the IS in the 100-400mm and 300mm f/4 is an older generation version, with only 2-stops assistance and not useable on tripods, which limits its hand-holding effectiveness in poor light, especially with the slower 100-400mm lens.
 
Hor Kee said:
You'll certainly not regret the &D + 400mm 5.6 combo. Light, focuses very fast and relatively affordable. Further, bear in mind that the IS in the 100-400mm and 300mm f/4 is an older generation version, with only 2-stops assistance and not useable on tripods, which limits its hand-holding effectiveness in poor light, especially with the slower 100-400mm lens.
Click to expand...

It might be the older IS system but it is still very effective and if it gives you two stops advantage when handholding that is a big plus over the 400 prime. For me the 100-400 is the best option as it works in all the situations that the 400 f5.6 does but also has the flexibility of the zoom and the better close focus making it more usable for insects and mammals. When I had the 400 f5.6 I loved it and only sold it because I needed the money for other stuff and always promised myself another one. However when I had the money for another one I went for the 100-400 instead. It seems the ideal choice for the OP too as it will be a good lens for butterflies as well as birds.
 
I would not buy the 400/5.6L Lens , no IS ist the Reason.
The 100-400 and the 300/4 + 1.4 Teleconverter are both really good lenses for the price, maybe the best choice for this price.
Camera: The 7D ist very good (especially the Autofokus) and with the V2 Update now even better (finally Auto Iso!).
 
I'm using the 100-400 and really like it. My camera is a 50D and I mange to get pretty decent results with that combination although I am thinking of getting a 7D. Don't forget the 6D is now on the verge of being released. I'm not sure that it would suit me and seems expensive.
 
Tarsiger said:
I'd go with 7d plus 100-400 for versatility and a £250-£400 bridge camera (SX40/50 FZ150/200) next Spring (ie. a new financial year!!) for Butterflies and insects.
Russ
Click to expand...

7D plus 100 -400. Use the 100-400 for butterflies as well, consider an extension tube. Or spend about £250 - £300 for a second hand Sigma 150 macro for butterflies.
 
Amarillo said:
But for bird photography you almost always use the 400 with a fast shutter speed, so no IS isn't really a problem.
Click to expand...

ok long ago, but i would say: NO, because there are a lot of conditions, where you spotted a bird, sitting on a limb or perhabs an hunting Heron in small water
In that case an IS Lens is the right choice, in my opinion.
 
Steve Babbs said:
7D plus 100 -400. Use the 100-400 for butterflies as well, consider an extension tube. Or spend about £250 - £300 for a second hand Sigma 150 macro for butterflies.
Click to expand...

What Steve said! (but since that's what I've got, and like, I'm biased!)

But substituting the 300/4 + 1.4x and 400/5.6 in place of the 100-400 will get you to a very similar position, for fairly similar cost.

Another option to throw in would be a second hand 1D Mk III body, in place of the 7D.... the 1D is a bigger, heavier lump to carry round, and only has 1.3x rather than 1.6x crop factor (ie less magnification), but is a pro-quality camera and beats the 7D in various dimensions. Others will probably have a clearer view on the pros and cons here.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

G
OM-1 with Panasonic Leica 100-400
2
Replies
20
Views
5K
Jim M.
J
D
Beginner looking for advise (Canon 7d mkII + Tamron 100-400 Di VC USD)
Replies
12
Views
2K
mr_birdman
mr_birdman
T
Old v's new?
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Thrupenney Bit
T
Evan Atkinson
Looking to upgrade
Replies
3
Views
874
Evan Atkinson
Evan Atkinson
Passakorn
Which one to upgrade first, binoculars or spotting scope?
2
Replies
25
Views
4K
mskb
M

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top