It's even better than the 400/5.6.
Only in the centre.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
It's even better than the 400/5.6.
I was skeptical that this lens could live up to the hype. It appears the hype was justified:Roger at Lens rentals disagrees. He just posted a comparison of the old and new 100-400mm and there isn't that much difference between them.
The 70-200 f2.8 is a lousy lens for BIF. It is way too short. Same with the bare 300mm f2.8. The 300mm f2.8 with the 1.4x will work but it is starting to get heavy.Thanks to all! Now it is clear why I suck so badly at BIF. Clearly my next step is a 7D II. After that, a fast lens (as clearly advised by jrista and strongly implied by AprilForever). And practice. Thanks again.
BIF is not easy. Not by a long shot. I've been doing bird photography for a few years now, and BIF is definitely my weak spot. I've kind of stopped practicing, as I just don't have the lenses for it. A FAST lens is a big plus, so I really think the 70-200 f/2.8 is going to be a good lens to have, with or without a 1.4x TC. If you have the money, the 300 f/2.8 is great. I am not sure about the 500/4 on a 7D II (that's an effective ~810mm focal length...that's really long, makes for a pretty narrow FoV...I have a hard enough time with BIF at 600mm on the FF, let alone 800mm+). I think a 500/4 on a FF would be ok...it still seems a little long to me, especially if you do not already have good BIF skills (if you had good BIF skills, I think it would be excellent, you'll get a lot more detail...but learning on it would be tough, just keeping the bird in the frame would be tough with a 7D II.)
I don't see the inherent difference in wedding photographs one bride in a white dress looks pretty much the same as another. Portraits - same thing one guy in a suit looks like every other guy in suit.I think your question applies to photography in general now, not just wildlife.
Why's that? As one of the other big photo business segments weddings and portraits tend to look inherently different, an architecture/product/... all have different content as ordered by the client. To me, wildlife photogs seems to be among the most endangered species as w/o further amendments, the content never gets outdated.Unfortunately as you point out, wildlife photography has become a measuring contest of one's financial power (having the latest gear) as well as their availability to be out in the field almost everyday.
Yes, the latter cannot be helped I'm afraid to say :-o ... but one other catch of wildlife tele shots is that if you manage to get a great shot with your 600mm, the less wealthy photog can still get lucky and get a better shot with his/her cheaper 300mm as long as the subject doesn't eat you. So i reckon there's more in it for beginners, unlike with sports where you have to sit at the edge of the field and simply have to have a 1dx+600mm.
Anti-Canon = everything Canon does is bad.
Canon fanboy = everything Canon does is good.
Neutral = Canon is best at many things but not everything.
Ok, so that makes me Neutral.
Personally I prefer primes, I shot mostly with a 400mm f5.6L until i upgraded to a 500mm f4L.People prefer zooms.
I can easily understand it. But zooms have also huge disadvantages especially with a x4 range:
The primes are not as complex as a zoom and could really be optimized and for wildlife photography you are anyway at the longer focal length you have at least 95% of the time.
So are primes so bad at all?
Which has caused my old brain to start wondering why nobody has reverse engineered the WFT-E7A and produced a cheaper model. There are off-brand battery grips, selling for a fraction of the cost of a Canon. Surely it wouldn't be too difficult to manufacture a wi-fi unit which sold in the $300.00 range....or perhaps it is too difficult which is why I'm never heard of one.
I assume the latter - look at the disastrous performance of Yn's rt flash transmitter clone which obviously made them delay their whole line of announced rt flashes.
It's true that wifi is standardized and it should be easier to implement, but sub-par radio performance is annoying and will make a lot of people buy the more expensive, but working model. With battery grips it doesn't matter as much for non-critical shooting if you can buy 3x-4x clones for the price of 1x original.
The only bundle that I have seen 7DII is with the EF-S18-135. In fact this costs 300 more than body only 7DII.Canon Canada has a special offer on the bundle that prices the 24-70mm f4L at $399 CDN
Where is a bundle 7DII with 24-70 f/4 IS available and sold in this price?
Yup...enough with the fear mongering.+1 Seriously. Unless you jam the card in the wrong way or something, it doesn't happen. I've been using CF cards for 15+ years as well with no issues. I've never had a card failure, either and they are tough as hell and have been through many wash cycles in my pants. I've only had 1 SD card failure, but find the size a bad thing in terms of them being easier to lose.
I've been shooting CF cards for 15 years and not once have I bent pins or messed up the mechanical interface in any way. I've had exactly one card go bad in all that time (of hundreds I've owned), and that was when one fell out of my card wallet and got run over by a fire truck.
If the CF cards are faster in the 7DII, I'd go for them as you're going to need all the speed you can get with that camera!
Guys, thank you all so very much.
I've decided to buy a CF card but probably after a few weeks of experience with the SD cards I have.
I'm so excited about this 7Dii
I would stick with the 5D.... You might be able to sell it to cover the cost of the 7D alone, but not have enough for a prime (other than a 50 1.8 at best).