Canon 100-400 II lens vs 7D II

[Jonathan Cross]

I have a Canon 5D III and, among my lenses, a 70-200 L IS f4 and a 1.4 II extender.  I want more reach for wildlife.  Should I buy a 100-400 II lens or spend less on a 7D II body to use with my 70-200 lens and the 1.4 extender?

Any advice would be appreciated!

Jonathan

[stever]

the 100-400ii with and without the 1.4xiii (the 1.4ii is not as good, but I can't say how much) on the 5D3 provides much higher resolution across the image with significantly lower high ISO noise which is extremely useful for wildlife.  the 100-400 has better resolution at the edges than the 70-200 f4 and slightly better resolution overall - it also seems to work a little better with the extender.  the 100-400 stabilization is at least one stop better as well.

I used the 5D3 and 100-400 with extender in Central America rainforests last year and got useable bird shots at ISO 6400 and 1/60 sec hand held at 560mm with the extender.

if you find you need 896 mm (eff) you can buy the 7D2 on sale later.

[prairiewing]

I have all the pieces of gear mentioned in your post and I completely agree with stever (though sadly,  I've never been to a rainforest).  I've used the 100-400II with 5D3, 7D2 and 5Dsr and find it extremely versatile and useful.  My end use is the print, bigger the better and I feel it holds up well beside the L primes I used before I got this lens.  I've used it a few times with the 1.4 extender but not enough to render a judgement.  Having said all that, I'm a user not a tester so I don't have any charts or brick walls to back up my observations.

[Rory]

I want more reach for wildlife.

What kind of wildlife?  If you mean birds, then you will always be thinking about more reach.  The 7DMKII and new 100-400 are an excellent combo.  While the files are not quite as good as the 5DMKIII, the focus and FPS are exceptional for wildlife.  I'm not sure how well the 100-400 + 1.4X works on the 5DMKIII or 7DMKII.  You will only be able to use the center focus reticle.  This works for statics, but not so much for lively subjects.

[Jonathan Cross]

In reply to Rory - all sorts of wildlife - most recently an egret at a distance.  It could be seals or deer, but I guess the main use will be for birds, e.g. puffins, terns, gannets, kites, etc.  The requirement therefore is for reach and tracking.

Thanks for the replies so far.  I am going to the big Photography Show in Birmingham, UK, next week so will quiz Canon and try out the kit there, but it really helps to get user feedback.

Jonathan

[Rory]

The requirement therefore is for reach and tracking.

Hi Jonathon.  I've been shooting wildlife for many years and there really are no shortcuts to getting great results.  You need a responsive camera that can track and you need to put lots of pixels on the subject.  To do this with today's cameras you really need to shoot at f/5.6 or faster.  With birds 600mm is often a minimum focal length (35mm full frame) and 1000mm is often barely enough.  So the 7DMKII + 100-400mm gets you 640mm equivalent at f/5.6 with image stabilization.  To beat this you'll have to jump into the 500/600mm super teles.

By concidence, I just shot some birds with my 7DMKII and 400DO yesterday - you can see them here - the first 4 frames.  This will give you an idea of what 400mm will do at f/4 on a Canon crop body.  All the images were only cropped slightly in the long direction.  At f/5.6 you'll be losing a bit of isolation with the increased DOF.

[stever]

I agree that 600 mm is about the starting point for most any kind of wild bird.  However I've recently done some practical bird shooting with my new 7D2 and the 100-400ii with 1.4xii hand - held with quite satisfactory results.  Some time ago I tried the 7D and old 100-400 with 1.4x using liveview on tripod - marginal resolution and the limitations of liveview focusing severely limited the usefulness of this combination. The 7d2 f8 autofocusing with center spot (which generally works for birds anyhow) is quick enough and resolution good enough with 100-400ii to make this a practical combination - with reasonable light (particularly shooting RAW with Lightroom to help with the higher ISO required).

In any case, I recommend the 100-400ii as the first priority (economically far better than a 7d2), then the 7d2, and finally a 1.xii.

the 7d2 and 70-200 f4 can work with the 2xiii but the resolution gets pretty marginal

[shadowblade]

Have you considered the Sigma 150-600 Sport? Similar price range, similar IQ at 400mm and you get 50% more reach.

[shadowblade]

Above all else, probably the most useful thing is a good monopod...

[Jonathan Cross]

Can I thank those who contributed to this.  I went to the Photography Show in Birmingham UK (it is a huge show) and talked to Canon and also Fuji.  Canon suggested that I try a 2x extender to get 400 with my 5D Mk3 and 70-200 lens, so I got one.  When I tested it on my kit at home, it did not give the IQ I wanted, so I took it back and got my money refunded.  While I quite liked the Fuji 100-400 (I have an X-T1) it seemed rather new and I had not read much about how it worked for birds in flight. While there I did get a Manfrotto carbon fibre monopod.

I have now been to my local camera shop (London Camera Exchange), and took shots outside of the same scene with my 5D3 and my 70-200 both with and without my 1.4 extender and with a 100-400 mk2.  I did the same shots with a 7D Mk2, and then came home and compared them.  My conclusion was that while the 7D gave effectively gave more reach because of its crop factor, there was more noise at ISO800 which I may use for birds as I want a fast exposure (faster than 1/1000 sec).  I have therefore now got the 100-400 Mk2 lens for my 5D3.  To help fund this I traded in a Leica 35mm Summicron and Fuji adaptor.  This made me sad, as the Leica is such a superb piece of engineering, but I do not use the lens on my X-T1.   I have the 23mm and 56mm primes and use them in preference.

My first shots with the 100-400 have really pleased me.  I will now go to a wetlands centre to get some practice.

Again thanks to those who took the time to respond to my initial query.

Jonathan