Senario: You are traveling to photograph scenery and wildlife with two camera bodies. The first is a 5D3 or 1DX with a high quality normal zoom of your choice. Please choose your second body for the trip: another FF as above or a crop, lets specify 7D for maximum reach. The 2nd body will be used primarily with a 100-400. If your 2nd body is FF it will have f8 AF and can use an optional 1.4x teleconverter. Note option 3 means you swap lenses in the field between the crop and FF bodies (my least favorite).
Background: Richard's thread basically asked the question of whether he should photograph brown bears with his 1DX or his 7D. The consensus was that you'll get more pixels on the bear with the 7D but it was subjective whether this was "better". JCowell suggested using a 1.4x with the 1DX. Kevindar suggested that (with 100-400 but not 500 f4) a 1.4x would degrade the FF image more than using the 7D. There was lots of discussion about whose pixels were better.
When I'm in the field I like to have two bodies, one for scenery and one for wildlife, because I find swapping lenses between two cameras a hassle. But I've also found that my 5D makes much better use of my 100-400 than my 7D unless I'm reach limited. Surveying my 100-400 images, I'm reach limited somewhat less than half the time. So given that Richard's 1DX and soon the 5D3 will be able to autofocus a 100-400 with a 1.4x, what's the best second body FF or crop? I know a 500 or 600 would be best but that's not in the cards for me for bulk and cost.
I mainly shoot wildlife and some landscape. My preference isn't listed in the poll but I thought I would offer it anyway. My main body is a 1dx, I use that for telephoto (usually 800) and wide (usually 17-40). I use a 1d mk4 as backup but mainly for wildlife with either the 500mm or 70-300 mounted. Of course there exceptions to what I do but this is my go to setup if I'm carrying 2 bodies.
I'd prefer a 1.4X extender on FF over APS-C. Why? It's a lot easier to compose (& enjoyable) with that big 'n bright VF and smooth image files look better on monitor and in print.
Dec 31, 2012 at 02:39 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Sounds like your doing an equal amount of landscape and wildlife.(?) If that's the case I'd probably take 2 5dIII's. If you have a lot left over I'd pick up used 300 2.8 IS to use with the extenders (meaning I'd rather have the 300 vs the 1dx)
Lars Johnsson wrote:
I would choose a 1DX and a 1D4 as a second body
Yah, me too. And a 600 f4 and a 20 year old blonde, blue eyed, athletic, female assistant to port it all around for me. Oh and Nathan Fillion's Lear Jet to take me there.
Actually I'm leaning towards Peter's (Gochugogi's) sentiment that the 5D# is so much nicer to work with, just use that and live with everything else.
So the real question is, is the upside of using the 5D3 when you are not reach limited better than the downside of needing a 1.4x when you are -or- is the downside of using the 7D when you are not reach limited worth the upside of using the 7D when you are? Or in other words, if I buy a 5D3 do I sell the 7D or the 5D2? Cheers and Happy New Year!
Having 2 1Dx's and having used them in combination with a mk4 for extra reach prior to the F8 mod id go with the TC on the X on a prime for reach.
Dont use my 100-400 much..
How do you get all that in a light plane for the ride out to the Serengeti?