Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
7d Or 100-400 L  
User currently offlinePflapf From Germany, joined Oct 2009, 2 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 2 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6201 times:

hi all,

i'm planning to upgrade my current camera or lens. unfortunately bugdet doesn't allow both upgrades at once. so my question is what you think of both options. currently i have a 20d and a 55-250 IS and i'm quite happy with it. what i don't like is that it's a bit too noisy at ISO 200+ and a bit too soft, especially at 200+mm.

option 1: upgrade to a 7d, should be better in terms of noise
option 2: upgrade to a 100-400 L IS USM, should be better in terms of sharpness.

i'm heading a bit for option 1. but just a bit.

thanks.

dirk

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5499 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (5 years 2 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6185 times:

Moving from the 55-250 to the 100-400 would be a huge step up in quality and sharpness. 20D is a great camera. If you still really want a new body, why not give the 50D a look?

User currently offlineCpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4881 posts, RR: 37
Reply 2, posted (5 years 2 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6180 times:

One vote here for the 7D. And if you are happy with the 55-250IS, then good.  Smile

I'm not so sure the 100-400L is that big a deal to be honest. Maybe if you want it desperately, save up and get it some time later.

If you are making do without the 100-400L now, then you should be able to make do without it still, and get the benefits that the 7D brings.


User currently offlineAlevik From Canada, joined Mar 2009, 1072 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (5 years 2 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6174 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

If you need the reach, get the new glass. If the places you spot you can get full frame with 200mm and the other photography interests you have don't need past 250mm, then perhaps the body is best.

If you find yourself cropping a lot to get full frame, then you need longer glass.

Cameras change frequently and become obsolete. Soon there will be an 8D or a 9D. The 100-400 will stay useful until the 12D or 13D.



Improvise, adapt, overcome.
User currently offlineConoramoia From Ireland, joined Oct 2007, 499 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (5 years 2 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 6164 times:

Why don't you get a 40D with a 70-200mm IS USM.

I'd do that and then save a little.
You wouldn't be losing a lot over the 250mm.

Just a taught


Regards,

Conor


User currently offlineFredS From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 25 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (5 years 2 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 6145 times:

Hi Dirk,
If you are considering a 7D at a lot more expense price than say a 40D which has very good noise abilities at higher ISO's then I presume you are also interested in using the 7D's High Definition 1080P Movie Recording abilities.

It's a great idea to have an all in one DSLR/Camcorder and I have had a look at the Recording side of the 7D as I have a Sony HD 1080P Camcorder as well as a Canon 40D and 100-400mm.

From what I see of the specs it has Mono Recording sound when I was hoping for Stereo and more of a problem for me personally is no mention of a lower recording sound from the built in Mic.

My Sony Cam has a "Normal" or "Low" option for sound and I nearlly always have it on "Low" to reduce the hellish wind noise you get at times so I wouldn't be without that.

Just thought I would add some personal thoughts on the Recording side in case it is of interest.

If I were in your shoes I would be looking at buying a 100-400mm now and waiting to see what the specs are for the next Model after the 7D that will inevitably come. I have had my 100-400mm since 2004 and wouldn't be without it especially for longer distance shooting.

Since buying my 100-400mm I have upgraded from a 10D to a 400D then to my current 40D, having good Glass comes first for me.

Fred.


User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1754 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (5 years 2 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 6127 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'd go for the 100-400 or whatever telezoom you'd like to use. You can get excellent results with that lens on your current body.


From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 45
Reply 7, posted (5 years 2 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 6111 times:

lens first .........glass is more important than the body.

down the road you can still buy a new body.

Vasco


User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 8, posted (5 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 6090 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Go with the 100-400, just my advice. I used that combo until last year so have a look at my shots before oct 2008 for some examples

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineTrackcharlie From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2008, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (5 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 6080 times:

My thoughts out loud....


Option 1: A 40D and a 100-400L. A good combo IMO. Do you really need 18MP or would 10MP do you? I have the 40D and love it. Produces large enough files for me to print what I need and the noise performance is satisfactory for me. If you sold your 20D and old lens you wouldn't be too far over budget and have both.

Option 2: By the 100-400L first. Glass lasts for a long time. By the time you buy the camera body maybe the 8D will be out the way Canon is going. I may be wrong but in my experience cheap lenses add grain to shots so an improvement would be made there straight away. Same for sharpness.

Option 3: Buy the 7D and use the 55-250 on it until you can buy the 100-400L. IMO you would still have some of the problems of softness and noise (see option 2). The sensor in the camera can only process the quality of image it recieves from the lens.
18MP will show lens flaws even more.

In conclusion, go for the lens first. You may find you don't need a new camera body for a while and you will be amazed at the difference L lenses make.

Yeah, go for the lens. I've decided!


PS It depends on how long it will be between purchases. A few months OK. Whatever. But a year or more i'd go for the lens. Again.


User currently offlineWalter2222 From Belgium, joined Sep 2005, 1303 posts, RR: 28
Reply 10, posted (5 years 2 months 2 days ago) and read 6046 times:

If I were you, I would go for the lens! I have used it for a long time on my 300D and I was satisfied with the combo. I recently upgraded to the 40D, but sometimes I still shoot with the 300D attached to the 100-400. With your 20D, you should be fine with the 100-400 in front of it!

Best regards,

Walter



canon 340d ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l is usm - ...
User currently offlineSpencer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1635 posts, RR: 17
Reply 11, posted (5 years 2 months 2 days ago) and read 6029 times:

Lens. It's a no-brainer.
Spence.



EOS1D4, 7D, 30D, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS USM, 70-200/2.8 L IS2 USM, 17-40 f4 L USM, 24-105 f4 L IS USM, 85 f1.8 USM
User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1071 posts, RR: 33
Reply 12, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6020 times:

100-400L.
Ive had mine since i had a 10D so its now outlasted a 10D,20D,40D,50D,1Dmk2N...
I think you get the picture great lenses last the test of time cameras come and go.



2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5961 times:

Another vote for the lens. A 20D with the 100-400L will give better results than even a 1Ds III with that 55-250IS. I think it would look a bit odd having a body such as the 7D with a budget lens hanging off the front. Out in the field I never see people with expensive bodies and cheap glass (or plastic?) - if anything they're carrying's cheap it's usually the body.

Karl


User currently offlineDazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5499 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5938 times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jeffrey S. DeVore



Just plugging Jeff's shot here with the 20D and 100-400. 20D is still a very capable camera.


User currently offlineGPHOTO From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 833 posts, RR: 24
Reply 15, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5937 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Another vote for the lens, first, then go for the body. I shoot with a 350D (please don't laugh  Smile ) and upgraded to the 100-400L from the 70-300mm IS USM, which in itself gives fairly good bang for the buck, though not L glass.

The difference was like having a new sensor put in my old camera body - sharper, contrastier, just all round better and further reach too, should you need it. I had to adjust my workflow slightly to cope with the performance improvement which was a nice bonus when I got used to it.

I want to upgrade my camera at some point, but finances dictate this could be a while. In the meantime, the 100-400L has breathed new life into the body I already have and it should still be around to use on that new body one day.

Best regards,

Jim



Erm, is this thing on?
User currently offlineBottie From Belgium, joined May 2004, 281 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5915 times:

I've got myself some new gear:

Canon 100-400L
Canon 7D+grip
Canon EF 300f/2,8
Canon 2x TC

I already have a 40D+grip and 17-40L

some years ago I had to choose between a new body or a now lens, I picked a new lens and like said before, it was like a had a new camera, don't forget it's the lens which has the biggest impact on your quality.


When you have to make a choice, first go for the lens, like said before, the 20D is still a good camera.


User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1991 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5896 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The 100-400, of course. I don't know if anyone has mentioned above - stepping up to a camera with twice the number of megapixel, you may be very disappointed with the quality of images you get with your old lens. The 100-400 is fantastic for aviation photography, one of the best.

Andrei


User currently offlineRonS From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 762 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5872 times:

Let's say the OP had an imaginary friend and this friend's camera body was a Rebel XS. Would people then recommend replacing with body? And if so with what (40D,50D,7D)? This friend has a 70-200 f/4 non IS (soon to be f/4 IS), a 28-105 USM II and kit 18-55.

Thanks. Didn't want to hijack this thread, but no sense starting a new one when the OP seems to have his answer  

R

[Edited 2009-10-29 13:45:54]


All opinions expressed by me are my own opinions & do not represent the opinions in any way of my employers.
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5865 times:



Quoting RonS (Reply 18):
Let's say the OP had an imaginary friend and this friend's camera body was a Rebel XS. Would people then recommend replacing with body? And if so with what (40D,50D,7D)? This friend has a 70-200 f/4 non IS (soon to be f/4 IS), a 28-105 USM II and kit 18-55.

Thanks. Didn't want to hijack this thread, but no sense starting a new one when the OP seems to have his answer

????????????????????????????

Forgive me Ron but I don't get it.....

Karl


User currently offlineRonS From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 762 posts, RR: 22
Reply 20, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5863 times:

I was trying to be funny. No sense starting a new thread. People are saying that the Original Poster's 20D is still good, to go with a new lens.

If you simply had a Rebel XS though, like me, is it time to upgrade the body to take the next jump in photography. Or stick it out with the XS for another year.

I could use a wide angle like the 17-55 2.8IS or 17-40L or even a 400MM f/5.6. Or should I just keep what I got of the three lenses above 70-200, 18-55, 28-105 and get a new body and if so which?



All opinions expressed by me are my own opinions & do not represent the opinions in any way of my employers.
User currently offlineTrackcharlie From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2008, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 5857 times:

Just another consideration when upgrading your camera: (applies only to RAW shooters)

Photoshop users need to check that their version of Photoshop and Adobe Camera Raw support (or will support) RAWs from the new camera.

For example, when I bought my 40D I found that CS2 would not process my RAWs and Adobe was not going to update camera raw. So I had to upgrade to CS3 which is not cheap.

I know you can use the supplied Canon Software (DPP) but my own personal workflow preference is to use Adobe Camera Raw. I just think its way cooler!

Fro what I can gather from the Adobe website, support for the 7D is not yet released so if you use Photoshop here is another reason to buy the lens over the cam!

This also applies to Camera Raw in Lightroom 2/3 BETA of course.

TC


User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 5846 times:

Ron,

XS (1000D?) is fine - just over a year old and 10MP so not outdated yet. In fact it's still a current model so no body upgrade needed there!

Decent set of lenses too - you wouldn't notice too much difference upgrading at the moment.

Karl


User currently offlineBottie From Belgium, joined May 2004, 281 posts, RR: 8
Reply 23, posted (5 years 2 months 1 day ago) and read 5838 times:



Quoting Trackcharlie (Reply 21):
Fro what I can gather from the Adobe website, support for the 7D is not yet released so if you use Photoshop here is another reason to buy the lens over the cam!

Updated Photoshop CS4 and Adobe Camera Raw and works perfectly for my 7D RAW-shots (20mb/RAW ......)


User currently offlineTrackcharlie From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2008, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (5 years 2 months 22 hours ago) and read 5830 times:



Quoting Bottie (Reply 23):
Quoting Trackcharlie (Reply 21):
Fro what I can gather from the Adobe website, support for the 7D is not yet released so if you use Photoshop here is another reason to buy the lens over the cam!

Updated Photoshop CS4 and Adobe Camera Raw and works perfectly for my 7D RAW-shots (20mb/RAW ......)

Oh OK. Been updated then....20MB files! I bet these eat hard drive.  Wow!


TC.


User currently offlinePflapf From Germany, joined Oct 2009, 2 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (5 years 2 months 8 hours ago) and read 5797 times:

hi,

thanks for all your replies. looks like it's going to be the lens first.  Smile

i just uploaded a few photos taken with the 55-250 but need to wait for approval. looking at the mtf tables i'm not sure if i really gain that much with the 100-400. did anyone check them or does anyone know where i can find a comparison?

dirk


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Canon 100-400 Or 300 L Or 400 L? posted Sat May 13 2006 00:37:44 by LHRSIMON
Canon 100-400 Or 70-200 + 2X TC? posted Sun Jul 20 2003 14:59:20 by Mirage
Canon 100-400 L Is USM Lens posted Wed Jul 22 2009 04:01:06 by Snecma
This Look Right? 50D + 100-400 L posted Fri Mar 6 2009 15:48:54 by CaliSam
What's Best For My Money: Nikkor 70-300 Or 80-400? posted Wed Jan 21 2009 13:32:33 by FLY2HMO
Canon 100-400 Fell Off In Quality After 2 Years posted Tue Jan 6 2009 10:40:07 by Whisperjet
Rumor: Canon 100-400 L MkII Specs posted Mon Dec 29 2008 05:46:19 by SNATH
Any Rumors On A Canon 100-400 L Replacement? posted Fri Nov 28 2008 03:05:40 by SNATH
Canon 100-400 Lens Questions. posted Sun Oct 19 2008 12:37:22 by Apollo13
Have You Had This Problem With Canon 100-400 posted Tue Jan 8 2008 08:20:27 by Mirrodie
Buying A 7D Or 5DmkII In HKG... Still Good? posted Fri Feb 5 2010 13:49:30 by airtrainer
Canon EF 100-400 Age Issues posted Wed Dec 23 2009 05:22:10 by Whisperjet
Canon 100-400 L Is USM Lens posted Wed Jul 22 2009 04:01:06 by Snecma
This Look Right? 50D + 100-400 L posted Fri Mar 6 2009 15:48:54 by CaliSam