what body would you pic

[athena]

i really thank everyone for their comments. I appreciate it very much. would like to ask a follow up question.

so we have two front runners. 7d and 1d. both are older. and revamps should happen relatively soon. somewhat soon.

My current theory is this, I have a 100-400 right now which makes ideal sense to place on a 7d. and then just sit and wait to see what's happens in the next two years?

unless someone thinks 100-400 in the 1d somehow makes sense. I thinks it the better body out of the two for sure. but then I have to get a larger lens to carry around. hmmmmm

Seriously?! Why do I feel this thread is not serious!

You're wondering whether to get a 7D or a 1D X and money is no object!! lol

yeah it was a serious post.

i don't feel like buying new lenses. i am new to the canon field. and i feel that are enough differences between the 1 and 7 to warrant the follow up question technically. so i asked. the cost is not my concern. had a specific use in mind and wanted fed back.

the people here gave me great things to think about which was the idea. thanks again for everyone who really layed out these formative answers

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Having owned the 1DX for nearly 2 years I would suggest that you get one - well I would wouldn't I?
The 7D2 would be my second choice, it is an excellent camera, but it is somewhat behind the 1DX in what I consider to be important factors. The 7D2, whilst fast, is not as quick to respond and AF lock is slightly slower. The extra reach of the more densely populated APSC sensor is overstated in my experience and is far less than the 1.6 crop factor would suggest - this may be because the 1DX resolves detail better and has superior IQ. Either way, having tried them against one another I would go for the 1DX. There is a big difference in the ISO performance! I am quite happy to use my 1DX at over 8000 ISO but it is best kept below this figure if possible - I simply cannot be bothered to muck about with NR software.
None of the above is decrying the 7D2, the 1DX is about 3 times the price - it should be better!
I primarily shoot wildlife/birds with the Canon 300 F2.8 or 800 F5.6 lenses on my 1Dx - it simply outperforms every other camera body of every manufacturer that I have yet tried for my photography.

 

[jeffa4444]

Going to go against the trend here and suggest the 5DS or 5DSr both of which can crop to 1.3X or 1.6X. They both have the profile of the 5D MKIII with the same 61 point AF and new metering of the 7DMKII. Yes the burst mode is lower but the MP is higher, much higher. Im assuming your be using some kind of gimbal head so steadiness will not be an issue.

 

[StudentOfLight]

If money is no limitation then, I'd buy a 1D-X attached to a 600mm f/4L II + 1.4xTC-III for small birds and a 7D Mark-II attached to a 100-400mm L II for shooting hand-held.

 

[RGF]

i would like feedback on what people here would do. which body would they pick. for bird shots. mostly flight. but not all.

i am not interested in any video aspects that the bodies may or may not offer. lets pretend all the cameras are free. i dont want opinion based on price. i want to know what you would choose and why. the why is super important to me. or even other suggestion perhaps.

these are the options.
5D Mark III
5DS R
7D Mark II
5DS DSLR
1D X DSLR

thank you.

1dX if you have very long glass. If you have long, but not very long glass, then the 7DII

 

[RGF]

Money, size and weight no object? Then I'd say 1Dx w/600 L or preferably the new 600 DO L and someone to carry it for you! Of course, you could go with 7DII w/400L and a nice used car for the same investment. Some are trying the 5Ds(R) with shorter lenses (i.e. 300-400 mm) and cropping deeper into the image. Not enough data yet to tell if that is any better than just using 7DII. Of course, having the 5Ds(R) has advantages for other uses beside BIF if huge prints are needed. I'm not helping am I.

5Ds (R) cropped to 1.6 is 7D II. Well sort of.

 

[Pookie]

i really thank everyone for their comments. I appreciate it very much. would like to ask a follow up question.

so we have two front runners. 7d and 1d. both are older. and revamps should happen relatively soon. somewhat soon.

My current theory is this, I have a 100-400 right now which makes ideal sense to place on a 7d. and then just sit and wait to see what's happens in the next two years?

unless someone thinks 100-400 in the 1d somehow makes sense. I thinks it the better body out of the two for sure. but then I have to get a larger lens to carry around. hmmmmm

Seriously?! Why do I feel this thread is not serious!

You're wondering whether to get a 7D or a 1D X and money is no object!! lol

+1000 Really as waste of thought on that point alone.

 

[wsmith96]

I'd certainly go with a 1DX. The 7D MK II is a nice camera, but its no 1 series.

+1 same as everyone else. If size/weight is a concern then 7d mkii with smaller telephoto (300 mm)

 

[FEBS]

I did a safari last year and a month ago. Besides mammals, I also like to photograph birds, static but also in the flight.
Last year I used the 1Dx with the 200-400. However for birds, I wanted more mm.
This year I used the 1Dx with 600 +1.4 attached. What a combination, just keep it stable on a bean bag or a gimbal head on a tripod. This combination however is hard to use for bif, as it is not that easy to find the bird through a 840mm. For that reason I used my 1Dx with 300 2.8 with/without 1.4 extender. You need the high speed to get more shots during the short period you can track the bird. 7D2, which I also have, does have the speed, is very quiet, but the photos will never show the same quality as FF. The 5D3 is good for use for static birds, but with only 6 fps, not the best camera for bif.

So for me only one camera for birds, and that's for sure the 1Dx.