Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Swap A 100-400L For An EOS 6D?  
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4802 times:

Hi all,

I love my trusty 100-400L to bits but I've noticed this winter that I've hardly used it. I could sell it and - for just a little extra cash - buy an EOS 6D, but I'm not really sure which would be the greater asset to me and my photography.

Am I likely to get more out a FF body than I will out of that extra 200mm at the long end? I don't want to offload the 100-400L and find that I miss that all-important shot; on the flip side, how many shots have I missed by being limited to a 1.6 FOVCF body? I may be losing at the long end with a FF but I'll be gaining at the short end.

I know it's a hard question but perhaps someone has been in a similar predicament?

Cheers,

Karl

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4783 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JakTrax (Thread starter):
I know it's a hard question but perhaps someone has been in a similar predicament?

I was in a similar predicament. Right before the 6D came out, I sold my 100-400 to purchase a 5D Mark II and I have absolutely zero regrets. I found myself rarely using the 100-400 after getting a 70-200 2.8 IS. Granted for airline stuff, I have close enough access that 70-200 works well on both the 5D and the 7D. Since making the move one year ago I can count on one hand how many times I truly wished for the 100-400 back for a shot.

Quoting JakTrax (Thread starter):
Am I likely to get more out a FF body than I will out of that extra 200mm at the long end?

It depends on what you shoot. For me, as someone who doesn't primarily shoot aviation, I've experienced drastic improvement in my photos first after getting the 70-200 and then going FF. Those two additions have been far more useful to me than the missing 200mm, even when photographing airplanes.

I say go for it, Karl. If you can, keep your 50D when you need some extra "reach". Once you shoot FF, it's like putting glasses on for the first time. You'll see what you've been missing and never look back!  



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6335 posts, RR: 39
Reply 2, posted (11 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4748 times:

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 1):
I found myself rarely using the 100-400 after getting a 70-200 2.8 IS. Granted for airline stuff, I have close enough access that 70-200 works well on both the 5D and the 7D.

A situation I think I'll face. As good as the 5DIII is for low light stuff, the use of f/2.8 over f/4.5-5.6 of the 100-400 is likely to result in much better pictures. So I guess it's clear that I'm in a semi dilemma here to move up (I think I can trust a TC 2x III on it). That's what equipment upgrades do to you.. You keep on seeking the next upgrade once you get one.



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4690 times:

Almost impossible to answer!

I think as a rule I'd take lenses over bodies - I've never parted with a (decent) lens that I didn't later regret. Bodies come and go. I sold my 100-400 a few years back and have missed it ever since. Mostly for the flexibility the range gives rather than perfromance at 400 (I sold mine to fund a 500).

But full frame is certainly a very worthwhile step, which I'm sure you'll appreciate. On the whole I think I would recommend waiting until you can get a 6D without selling your 100-400. Chances are the even though you may not use it much now, in years hence you may well find it is exactly the lens you need.

I have a few lenses which are seldom used - my 100mm macro for instance - but only yesterday I had an assignment where it literally saved the day. I could have done the shoot with any body, but only that a tele macro would have got the required shot.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 4648 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ckw (Reply 3):
But full frame is certainly a very worthwhile step, which I'm sure you'll appreciate. On the whole I think I would recommend waiting until you can get a 6D without selling your 100-400. Chances are the even though you may not use it much now, in years hence you may well find it is exactly the lens you need.

My rationale was if I need the lens (100-400) back in the future, I can buy another copy.  

In my situation I didn't use it enough to justify keeping, especially when it meant I could upgrade to full frame. The 100-400 fixed a short term problem for me. I told myself in the long term I could always get the lens again, and someday I might.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2518 posts, RR: 17
Reply 5, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4638 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well if you have good access and are close to the planes then of course 400 may not be needed regularly. But, it is ALWAYS good to have extra mm available. I found that when I upgraded from a 1.6x to a FF the loss of "reach" was quite noticeable. Yes, I can crop way more now and keep the quality high but nothing beats having glass. Low light is probably the only time that would matter. To compare directly with the 70-200 lens, I think up to 200mm the 100-400 is VERY sharp. And then you still have 200mm more when and if you need it. You can never predict when you will. For me this is a no brainer. Keep the lens.

User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2818 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4635 times:

I would keep the 100-400mm Karl. You may not have used it much recently, but you're bound to need it sometime in the future and will probably regret getting shut, especially since you have a good copy. I suppose it's a case of cost - benefit analysis on the lens or a 6D; what will you stand to lose / gain with one or the other and what is most important to you?

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 7, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4633 times:

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 4):
My rationale was if I need the lens (100-400) back in the future, I can buy another copy.

Exactly what I thought when I sold mine - now I want it again and am caught in a "do I buy now or wait for the upgrade" dilemna! Who would have thought 6 years ago Canon would take so long with an update?

Bodies are easy - you know there will be an update in 18 months or so, and the body you want now will be a lot cheaper next year!

A friend just bought a 5Diii for little over half what I paid for it just over a year ago. Ouch.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4623 times:

Thanks for the input guys. Having had a bit more time to think it over I'm very reluctant to part with my 100-400L, so I'll likely just add the 6D when I feel I can justify the cost. My 50D won't be going anywhere, such is my affinity with it!

What prompted me to look at the 6D is the current price some stores are offering (apparently for a limited time only) - two places here in the UK have it for less than £1,100! - but I wonder whether this is some marketing ploy and if indeed one will be able to get one at that price pretty much any time. Is it a steal at this price or will it drop further once the 6D's been around a while?

Cheers,

Karl


User currently offlineUnited_fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7383 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4610 times:

Quoting ckw (Reply 3):
I think as a rule I'd take lenses over bodies - I've never parted with a (decent) lens that I didn't later regret. Bodies come and go.

I agree . I just got a 6D. My 4th Canon DSLR (I'm hooked,now) . Same 100-400L,though.



'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offline747438 From UK - England, joined Jan 2007, 837 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4590 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting United_fan (Reply 9):

Karl,
I've just purchased a 6D and use it with the 100-400. I'm more than happy with it.
My advice is to keep the lens and save for the 6D.


User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 11, posted (11 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4575 times:

I think you can be pretty sure the price will drop. I'd say 1100 is a bit steep when you can get a 5D3 for 1800 (nearly a 50% price drop in a year).

I'd also consider used 5d3 or 5D2 ... rumours are rife of the new 40-50mp full frame being tested in the field. When this is announced we may well see a glut of mere 22mp cameras on the market.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineTonyholt777 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 177 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (11 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4537 times:

Hi Karl

I have the 100-400 + FF and crop bodies. I have a very sharp 1-4 and its great with the FF amazing how much you can crop if necessary and still have loads of detail to use.

The 6d is a great camera especially with Canon offering a hundred quid cash back till the end of this month in the UK.

Also as Colin say there's lots of price movements, Canon seem to hit good prices around August too in the past.

I echo comments above keep the 1-4 then get a FF when you can.

best of luck mate

tony


User currently offlineUnited_fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7383 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (11 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4332 times:

Having used my new 6D and (old) 100/400 this week spotting, words cannot express my love for this camera.


'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
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...
€ 1299,- For An EOS 20D - Good Deal? posted Thu Nov 11 2004 09:08:17 by Paulianer
For Canon, Is 100-400L Still The Standard? posted Fri Jul 23 2010 15:03:20 by JohnJ
Looking For Refurbished Canon 100-400L Is posted Sat Mar 7 2009 17:38:29 by Devildog2222
On The Market For A 100-400L? posted Sun Apr 24 2005 00:37:39 by DLKAPA
An Used Canon 100-400L IS-USM posted Wed Aug 11 2004 23:54:06 by Volare
An EOS 500 N For 449 € : Need Help! posted Tue May 21 2002 20:38:58 by Rey777
EF 100-400L Vs EF 70-300L posted Wed Mar 6 2013 10:27:01 by Itay747
Sudden 50D / 100-400L Issue - Any Ideas Please? posted Tue Dec 11 2012 11:41:05 by JakTrax
Opinion On Image Quality (7D + 100-400L) posted Sun Jul 29 2012 17:41:19 by jpmagero
Update To "Tips On Buying A 100-400L" posted Sat Jan 28 2012 22:13:21 by atomother