Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

  

  Previous versions of Jeff Nolten's message #15983759 « Wildlife Trip: M6 II + EF 100-400L II vs R5/R6 + RF 100-500L »

  

Jeff Nolten
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Wildlife Trip: M6 II + EF 100-400L II vs R5/R6 + RF 100-500L


Assuming this is an Alaska Cruise similar to one we did three years ago, there are no cheap upgrades from your M5 kit. For our trip, I took 5D4, 24-105 L, and 100-400 L II. From shipboard, the wildlife was a bit too distant for my taste, but the 100-400 + 1.4xIII was just adequate (540 mm). I used the 24-105 more frequently for glacier shots, landscapes, museums, and people pictures. Don't neglect this focal range.

For our upcoming Kodiak Alaska trip, I am taking the same kit as it has served me well for many years. We just upgraded my wife's 77D kit to an R7 kit and I can borrow that for use with my 100-400 if necessary. However, I am starting out with a FF kit that I'm happy with. If I were starting with just an M5, I would have to go with the R5 or R6, RF 24-105 f4 L, and RF 100-500, equivalent to my current kit. I would suggest my wife use the M5 kit for its compactness (her preference). And I would be buying to keep since this replaces my standard travel kit. I don't know your future travel plans or financial situation. Buy, buy to sell, rent, or live with what you have are your options.

The M6II is a fun little high performance camera and I enjoy using it when I can afford the weight of a spare kit. It was great fun on a recent beach camping trip. I find I don't like using it with lenses larger than the EF 70-300 II. This lens is very sharp and gets you to 480mm equivalent reach. You could get an adapter and this lens and use it with your M5 if you think the reach would be adequate. The only native lenses I use with my M are the 11-22, 28 macro, and a collection of Sigma and Rokinon primes which are, for me, somewhat specialized in use. I wouldn't want to use it for this type of trip since its battery life is less and there are a limited range of zoom lens options. It is most likely now replaced by the R7.

Another option if you are happy with your M kit for what it covers is to buy used or rent a 77D or 80D and 100-400 (640 mm). In addition to the Canon 100-400, I have the Sigma 100-400 Contemporary. It weighs a pound less than the Canon, is cheaper and is almost identically sharp without 1.4x. Keep or sell depending. The 77D and 80D are wonderful cameras with the same sensor as your M5. The 77D is a bit lighter and with less customization. It uses the same battery as your M, but the 77D is not mirrorless so battery life is better. I prefer the 80D, my wife the 77D . You could also add the EF-S 15-85 which is better than the Canon APS-C kit lenses. My wife has been using this lens on her 77D for years and it yields great photos, including from our Alaska trip. I used my 80D with the Canon 100-400 for an African safari and was very happy with the results. My 2 cents.

77D refurbished Canon, $719
80D refurbished Amazon $948
Sigma 100-400 new Amazon $799
Canon 100-400 new or refurbished Amazon >$2000
Canon 70-300 II refurbished Amazon $619
Canon RF kit, == a small car.



Jul 04, 2022 at 12:06 PM
Jeff Nolten
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Wildlife Trip: M6 II + EF 100-400L II vs R5/R6 + RF 100-500L


Assuming this is an Alaska Cruise similar to one we did three years ago, there are no cheap upgrades from your M5 kit. For our trip, I took 5D4, 24-105 L, and 100-400 L II. From shipboard, the wildlife was a bit too distant for my taste, but the 100-400 + 1.4xIII was just adequate (540 mm). I used the 24-105 more frequently for glacier shots, landscapes, museums, and people pictures. Don't neglect this focal range.

For our upcoming Kodiak Alaska trip, I am taking the same kit as it has served me well for many years. We just upgraded my wife's 77D kit to an R7 kit and I can borrow that for use with my 100-400 if necessary. However, I am starting out with a FF kit that I'm happy with. If I were starting with just an M5, I would have to go with the R5 or R6, RF 24-105 f4 L, and RF 100-500, equivalent to my current kit. I would suggest my wife use the M5 kit for its compactness (her preference). And I would be buying to keep since this replaces my standard travel kit. I don't know your future travel plans or financial situation. Buy, buy to sell, rent, or live with what you have are your options.

The M6II is a fun little high performance camera and I enjoy using it when I can afford the weight of a spare kit. It was great fun on a recent beach camping trip. I find I don't like using it with lenses larger than the EF 70-300 II. This lens is very sharp and gets you to 480mm equivalent reach. You could get an adapter and this lens and use it with your M5 if you think the reach would be adequate. The only native lenses I use with my M are the 11-22, 28 macro, and a collection of Sigma and Rokinon primes which are, for me, somewhat specialized in use. I wouldn't want to use it for this type of trip since its battery life is less and there are a limited range of zoom lens options. It is most likely now replaced by the R7.

Another option if you are happy with your M kit for what it covers is to buy used or rent a 77D or 80D and 100-400 (640 mm). In addition to the Canon 100-400, I have the Sigma 100-400 Contemporary. It weighs a pound less than the Canon, is cheaper and is almost identically sharp without 1.4x. Keep or sell depending. The 77D and 80D are wonderful cameras with the same sensor as your M5. The 77D is a bit lighter and with less customization. It uses the same battery as your M, but the 77D is not mirrorless so battery life is better. I prefer the 80D, my wife the 77D . You could also add the EF-S 15-85 which is better than the Canon APS-C kit lenses. My wife has been using this lens on her 77D for years and it yields great photos, including from our Alaska trip. I used my 80D with the Canon 100-400 for an African safari and was very happy with the results. My 2 cents.



Jul 04, 2022 at 11:53 AM
Jeff Nolten
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Wildlife Trip: M6 II + EF 100-400L II vs R5/R6 + RF 100-500L


Assuming this is an Alaska Cruise similar to one we did three years ago, there are no cheap upgrades from your M5 kit. For our trip, I took 5D4, 24-105 L, and 100-400 L II. From shipboard, the wildlife was a bit too distant for my taste, but the 100-400 + 1.4xIII was just adequate (540 mm). I used the 24-105 more frequently for glacier shots, landscapes, museums, and people pictures. Don't neglect this focal range.

For our upcoming Kodiak Alaska trip, I am taking the same kit as it has served me well for many years. We just upgraded my wife's 77D kit to an R7 kit and I can borrow that for use with my 100-400 if necessary. However, I am starting out with a FF kit that I'm happy with. If I were starting with just an M5, I would have to go with the R5 or R6, RF 24-105 f4 L, and RF 100-500, equivalent to my current kit. I would suggest my wife use the M5 kit for its compactness (her preference). And I would be buying to keep since this replaces my standard travel kit. I don't know your future travel plans or financial situation. Buy, buy to sell, rent, or live with what you have are your options.

The M6II is a fun little high performance camera and I enjoy using it when I can afford the weight of a spare kit. It was great fun on a recent beach camping trip. I find I don't like using it with lenses larger than the EF 70-300 II. This lens is very sharp and gets you to 480mm equivalent reach. You could get an adapter and this lens and use it with your M5 if you think the reach would be adequate. The only native lenses I use with my M are the 11-22, 28 macro, and a collection of Sigma and Rokinon primes which are, for me, somewhat specialized in use. I wouldn't want to use it for this type of trip since its battery life is less and there are a limited range of zoom lens options. It is most likely now replaced by the R7.

Another option if you are happy with your M kit for what it covers is to buy used or rent a 77D or 80D and 100-400 (640 mm). In addition to the Canon 100-400, I have the Sigma 100-400 Contemporary. It weighs a pound less than the Canon, is cheaper and is almost identically sharp without 1.4x. Keep or sell depending. The 77D and 80D are wonderful cameras with the same sensor as your M5. The 77D is a bit lighter and with less customization and same battery as M6II; I prefer the 80D, my wife the 77D . You could also add the EF-S 15-85 which is better than the Canon APS-C kit lenses. My wife has been using this lens on her 77D for years and it yields great photos, including from our Alaska trip. I used my 80D with the Canon 100-400 for an African safari and was very happy with the results. My 2 cents.



Jul 04, 2022 at 11:49 AM
Jeff Nolten
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Wildlife Trip: M6 II + EF 100-400L II vs R5/R6 + RF 100-500L


Assuming this is an Alaska Cruise similar to one we did three years ago, there are no cheap upgrades from your M5 kit. For our trip, I took 5D4, 24-105 L, and 100-400 L II. From shipboard, the wildlife was a bit too distant for my taste, but the 100-400 + 1.4xIII was just adequate (540 mm). I used the 24-105 more frequently for glacier shots, landscapes, museums, and people pictures. Don't neglect this focal range.

For our upcoming Kodiak Alaska trip, I am taking the same kit as it has served me well for many years. We just upgraded my wife's 77D kit to an R7 kit and I can borrow that for use with my 100-400 if necessary. However, I am starting out with a FF kit that I'm happy with. If I were starting with just an M5, I would have to go with the R5 or R6, RF 24-105 f4 L, and RF 100-500, equivalent to my current kit. I would suggest my wife use the M5 kit for its compactness (her preference). And I would be buying to keep since this replaces my standard travel kit. I don't know your future travel plans or financial situation. Buy, buy to sell, rent, or live with what you have are your options.

The M6II is a fun little high performance camera and I enjoy using it when I can afford the weight of a spare kit. It was great fun on a recent beach camping trip. I find I don't like using it with lenses larger than the EF 70-300 II. This lens is very sharp and gets you to 480mm equivalent reach. You could get an adapter and this lens and use it with your M5 if you think the reach would be adequate. The only native lenses I use with my M are the 11-22, 28 macro, and a collection of Sigma and Rokinon primes which are, for me, somewhat specialized in use. I wouldn't want to use it for this type of trip since its battery life is less and there are a limited range of zoom lens options. It is most likely now replaced by the R7.

Another option if you are happy with your M kit for what it covers is to buy used or rent a 77D or 80D and 100-400 (640 mm). In addition to the Canon 100-400, I have the Sigma 100-400 Contemporary. It weighs a pound less than the Canon, is cheaper and is almost identically sharp without 1.4x. Keep or sell depending. The 77D and 80D are wonderful cameras with the same sensor as your M5. The 77D is a bit lighter and with less customization; I prefer the 80D, my wife the 77D . You could also add the EF-S 15-85 which is better than the Canon APS-C kit lenses. My wife has been using this lens on her 77D for years and it yields great photos, including from our Alaska trip. I used my 80D with the Canon 100-400 for an African safari and was very happy with the results. My 2 cents.



Jul 04, 2022 at 11:25 AM





  Previous versions of Jeff Nolten's message #15983759 « Wildlife Trip: M6 II + EF 100-400L II vs R5/R6 + RF 100-500L »