I was cleaning my closet this past weekend and found a hidden and heavy backpack. I knew I had it but completely forgot about it.
There were 7 Canon lenses and 2 cameras. All in mint condition, not used for a long time.
Cameras:
Canon EOS 7D
Canon EOS Rebel
Lenses:
Canon EF 17-35/2.8L
Canon EF 24-70/2.8L
Canon EF 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS
Canon EF 70-300/4-4.5 IS
Canon EF 50/1.8
Canon EFS 24/2.8
Canon EFS 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS
All original versions.
Should I sell it or adapt it to my current system? Or should I just use it on the Canon EOS 7D/Rebel bodies? Do these lenses even work well with AF adapters? If so, which one? I don't own any modern Canon but have a Sony A7R3.
If your thinking about selling the ef 100-400 and its version one in great shape i may be interested in buying it. I use mine all the time because i love the push/pull for sports. thanks, wcj0
Donate the kit to a local photography department, in a college or university, or something like that. Of course, ask them first. I once had a particular-brand donation scorned, because the department was supported by the other particular-brand. Not the school's decision; it was a condition of the support.
Well, if you don't want to spend a bunch of money, keep the 7D and 100-400. Of course you know that the 7D can't produce images without excessive noise, and the 100-400 is a dust vacuum.
The 100-400 is a great lens, and like many, I prefered the push-pull zoom and had no dust problems. Also, all my copies were as sharp as the 400 f5.6 at 400mm. It also had a good MFD.
If you want to spend some extra money, I would recommend using the 100-400 on the Canon R7 with an adapter. JMO
Tony
Canon EOS 20D100.0-400.0 mm lens260mmf/5.61/750s1600 ISO-0.5 EV
Canon EOS 7DEF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM lens375mmf/8.01/350s400 ISO0.0 EV
Canon EOS 7DEF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM lens210mmf/11.01/3200s12800 ISO0.0 EV
I've searched about AF performance looks like the original 100-400L does not adapt well on Sony bodies so I may use it on the 7D or get a cheaper full frame Sony body as suggested. Perhaps these classic lenses will be an excuse for me to slowly come back to shooting Canon.
I have ordered a Sigma MC-11 adapter and will check AF performance this week. If it does not work well, I will go the Canon body route.
Ferrophot wrote:
I don't know how the 100-400L gets this bad rap. Mines great, works well on my 6D and R6. And being a dust catcher is all rubbish too.
At the moment I don't have a full frame to test it with but it performs great on the Canon 7D. It's shaper than I remember and rendering is nice as well. My copy had 2 internal dust specs but it was very easy to clean.
Here is a quick test showing my dog in the backyard. Set to 400mm wide open with the Rebel. I forgot if this lens is compatible with TCs.
Canon EOS REBEL SL1EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM lens400mmf/5.61/800s100 ISO0.0 EV
Hey Fred, you can use the Canon TCs on the 100-400 though you need certain newer bodies that support AF at f/8 with at least the central focus point. I don't recall if the 7D is one of these. The 7DII probably is. This might be another reason to try out a Canon mirrorless. AF consistency will be much better than the DSLRs and it's no problem to AF off-center at f/8 or f/11 (see Canon's slow and inexpensive 600 and 800mm lenses as prime examples).
You can probably find a cheap R in addition to the RP. IIRC, with the latest firmware updates, the R's performance is pretty respectable. Or just look for an R6. The R7 would be the closest equivalent to the 7D, though IMO it's more a mirrorless version of the 70/80/90D series of cameras. That said, it's still quite nice for causal and some kinds of action oriented photography.
At any rate it's nice to hear the shutter sound of DSLR. I have been wanting to buy one just for memory, but a lot of them are in bad shapes, so maybe you can get something for 7D with a lens, raffle them out or donate
At any rate it's nice to hear the shutter sound of DSLR. I have been wanting to buy one just for memory, but a lot of them are in bad shapes, so maybe you can get something for 7D with a lens, raffle them out or donate
I agree Steven. I shot with the 7D + 100-400L today and was a pleasure to hear that shutter sound again!
Fred Miranda wrote:
I was cleaning my closet this past weekend and found a hidden and heavy backpack. I knew I had it but completely forgot about it.
There were 7 Canon lenses and 2 cameras. All in mint condition, not used for a long time.
Cameras:
Canon EOS 7D
Canon EOS Rebel
Lenses:
Canon EF 17-35/2.8L
Canon EF 24-70/2.8L
Canon EF 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS
Canon EF 70-300/4-4.5 IS
Canon EF 50/1.8
Canon EFS 24/2.8
Canon EFS 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS
All original versions.
Should I sell it or adapt it to my current system? Or should I just use it on the Canon EOS 7D/Rebel bodies? Do these lenses even work well with AF adapters? If so, which one? I don't own any modern Canon but have a Sony A7R3.
Congrats, that is quite a haul! I haven't read the other responses but I'll just do a list I guess.
7D: I still consider 18mp to not be obsolete, myself. Not much difference in high iso and resolution 18mp vs 24mp anyway imo and 24mp still produced. Have been posting on seasonal thread using 18mp.
Rebel: is this the 6mp model, someone actually posted WTB on B&S IIRC for one. A bit long in the tooth to actually use, I suppose you could argue that 50% crop on 24mp ff only 6mp. I have prints from 8mp . Still look great. If it's the 18mp SL1, my 18mp rebel imperceptibly sharper 800 vs 100 so I guess they did low iso NR on some of these. Might be better than 7D on landscape
17-35: curious how this compares to the 16-35's & 17-40. I liked my 17-35 Sigma a lot on aps, the corners at some settings not too great on ff seemed excellent 20mm though. If the lenses are comparable. I liked f/8 on the sigma
24-70/2.8: optical limits had a hard time finding a centered copy. You might look at their review of this lens and others you have that they tested. Not supposed to be as good as v2 might be OK if a well centered copy though. Especially on crop, although 24mm isn't really too wide on crop so 18-55 might be better, believe it or not.
100-400 v1: liked it on 8mp. have considered getting it recently, IS probably isn't as good but useful and v2 apparently has a focus shift up close. Light compared to the recent 3+lb ones
70-300 IS v1: returned one but possibly shouldn't have. Not as good as I wanted at 300mm but good. Had AF problems probably more user error. IS not too good. These type of lenses tend to be excellent up to 200mm or so. Even 300mm not too bad, though. Nice lens.
50/1.8: is this the metal mount? I've used v2 and like it. I feel like pretty much any 50mm is good by 5.6-8.
18-55 IS: optical limits has a pretty good review on this lens. Might not hurt to try a few, may be copy variation. I've used 18-55 IS II, STM, and non-IS v2. Liked them all. Pretty good imo. Very light on a rebel for landscapes if you have decent copy. Harder to do better than you'd think, I tried one sigma having better construction, not as good imo. Surprised DLO lens corrections in DPP really cleaned up the corners and edges on one I posted recently, STM version
So anyway hope that helps you decide, might be some fun shooting
AmbientMike wrote:
Congrats, that is quite a haul! I haven't read the other responses but I'll just do a list I guess.
7D: I still consider 18mp to not be obsolete, myself. Not much difference in high iso and resolution 18mp vs 24mp anyway imo. Have been posting on seasonal thread using 18mp.
I agree, there is a small difference between 18, 20 or 24MP sensors. They are all still quite good for a APS-C imo.
Rebel: is this the 6mp model, someone actually posted WTB on B&S IIRC for one. A bit long in the tooth to actually use, I suppose you could argue that 50% crop on 24mp ff only 6mp.
It's the Rebel SL1, so it has a 18MP sensor. I wonder if it's the same one from the Canon EOS 7D.
17-35: curious how this compares to the 16-35's & 17-40. I liked my 17-35 Sigma a lot on aps, the corners at some settings not too great on ff seemed excellent 20mm though. If the lenses are comparable. I liked f/8 on the sigma
24-70/2.8: optical limits had a hard time finding a centered copy. You might look at their review of this lens and others you have that they tested. Not supposed to be as good as v2 might be OK if a well centered copy though. Especially on crop, although 24mm isn't really too wide on crop so 18-55 might be better, believe it or not.
It's a good idea to test this one for centering. It's quite big and heavy at almost 1kg.
100-400 v1: liked it on 8mp. have considered getting it recently, IS probably isn't as good but useful and v2 apparently has a focus shift up close. Light compared to the recent 3+lb ones
I'm quite happy with this copy. It's sharp at all FLs but the real test will be with a high MP body.
70-300 IS v1: returned one but possibly shouldn't have. Not as good as I wanted at 300mm but good. Had AF problems probably more user error. IS not too good. These type of lenses tend to be excellent up to 200mm or so. Even 300mm not too bad, though. Nice lens.
I never really shot with this one so it's brand new. I think I bought it for my daughter but she thought it was too big. :-)
50/1.8: is this the metal mount? I've used v2 and like it. I feel like pretty much any 50mm is good by 5.6-8.
It's the STM model, so newer plastic mount I guess.
24/2.8 EFs: looks cool, tiny, never used. I'd think it's pretty good.
I remember testing it and it's a good compact lens.
18-55 IS: optical limits has a pretty good review on this lens. Might not hurt to try a few, may be copy variation. I've used 18-55 IS II, STM, and non-IS v2. Liked them all. Pretty good imo. Very light on a rebel for landscapes if you have decent copy. Harder to do better than you'd think, I tried one sigma having better construction, not as good imo. Surprised DLO lens corrections in DPP really cleaned up the corners and edges on one I posted recently, STM version
My version is the STM. I think it came with the Rebel SL1...again for my daughter but she moved to Sony a long time ago, so it just stayed in the closet...
So anyway hope that helps you decide, might be some fun shooting
Thanks for the info, I really appreciate it. It's amazing how much the "old days" gear is still capable. I may adapt them to Sony if AF is not iffy, just stay with the 7D or upgrade to a full frame like the RP or R6.
rscheffler wrote:
Hey Fred, you can use the Canon TCs on the 100-400 though you need certain newer bodies that support AF at f/8 with at least the central focus point. I don't recall if the 7D is one of these. The 7DII probably is. This might be another reason to try out a Canon mirrorless. AF consistency will be much better than the DSLRs and it's no problem to AF off-center at f/8 or f/11 (see Canon's slow and inexpensive 600 and 800mm lenses as prime examples).
You can probably find a cheap R in addition to the RP. IIRC, with the latest firmware updates, the R's performance is pretty respectable. Or just look for an R6. The R7 would be the closest equivalent to the 7D, though IMO it's more a mirrorless version of the 70/80/90D series of cameras. That said, it's still quite nice for causal and some kinds of action oriented photography....Show more →
I think you are right Ron. The 7D won't AF at f/8 so I cannot use the 1.4x teleconverter with it. If I remember correctly the 7D II will work with the 1.4x, although pretty slow.
Perhaps I should trade the 7D + Rebel SL1 for a RP + adapter.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Perhaps I should trade the 7D + Rebel SL1 for a RP + adapter.
This. The RP has its limitations, but with the firmware updates, the AF is solid and will be head and shoulders over the older DSLRs.
The main thing to know about the RP image quality is reduced DR, which translates to noisy shadows if you do much image manipulation. (This is the same sensor used in the 6D Mark II and is by far Canon's worst contemporary design.) However, you can almost completely mitigate this with DXO PureRAW, if you have a license. (I would recommend an R6 instead, but it will be more than double the price.)
Tom_W wrote:
The R7, in mechanical shutter mode, gives you a bit of that nice shutter sound.
The mechanical shutter is too loud, period. The big plus is that in electronic shutter mode you can not only turn on and off a simulated shutter sound, but also adjust its volume.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The Canon 17-35/2.8L is quite good. I actually compared it to the 16-35/2.8L (version I) here: https://www.fredmiranda.com/17_35VS16_35/ (Long time ago!!)
I remember that review! It was an additional nudge to get me to buy the then new 16-35 (for better sharpness). And then the 16-35/2.8 II (mixed results with that one). And finally the 16-35/4 IS.
---------------------------------------------
Fred Miranda wrote:
Perhaps I should trade the 7D + Rebel SL1 for a RP + adapter.
garyvot wrote:
This. The RP has its limitations, but with the firmware updates, the AF is solid and will be head and shoulders over the older DSLRs.
The main thing to know about the RP image quality is reduced DR, which translates to noisy shadows if you do much image manipulation. (This is the same sensor used in the 6D Mark II and is by far Canon's worst contemporary design.) However, you can almost completely mitigate this with DXO PureRAW, if you have a license. (I would recommend an R6 instead, but it will be more than double the price.)
Well, it's not like the 7D's sensor is really wide dynamic range, either. In fact it and the RP are quite similar at about 9 stops at base ISO. Going to the R will improve that to about 10.5 stops.
Here's the link to the three-way comparison on Photons to Photos.
