Best budget way to reach 400mm+ for wildlife with a Canon 5D Mark III
Asked 4/22/2013
5 views
2 answers
0
I shoot with a Canon 5D Mark III and already own the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. I’d like to start doing more wildlife photography (birds, puffins, general wildlife) and have about £1000 to spend.
I want the best possible reach and image quality for the money, ideally 400mm or more. Options I’m considering include:
- adding a Canon 1.4x or 2x teleconverter to my 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II
- buying a Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L
- buying an APS-C body such as a 7D to get more effective reach from cropping
- possibly a third-party superzoom such as the Sigma 50-500
For wildlife, which route makes the most sense in terms of sharpness, autofocus performance, and real-world usability? Also, is using a crop body meaningfully different from simply cropping files from the 5D Mark III?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
13y ago
2 Answers
9
The 70-200 F2.8L IS II works fine with a 2.0x teleconverter. That's my standard birding and critter lens these days. It's sharper than a 300F4+1.4x (my previous go to lens), and MUCH sharper than a canon 100-400 @ 400mm (my initial birding len). All are acceptable, the 70-200+2.0x is incredibly sharp and I'm really impressed with that lens combo. I use that on the 7D
If you want to look at images of the 7D/70-200/2x combo, try some of these:
http://www.chuqui.com/2013/04/house-wren/ -- which is actually a weak image, heavily backlit and processed, massive crop. and still not bad for a blog posting.
http://www.chuqui.com/2013/01/canon-70-200-f2-8l-is-vs-is-ii-plus-bonus-on-600mm-f8-option/ some of my test shots when I was evaluating this combo, including some 100% pixel peeping views, so you can see the sharpness difference.
Sigma 50-500: haven't tested it. Folks I know who have say its' usable, but slow AF and it softens at 500mm. Whether it's too soft is something you'll have to test and see for yourself. I've seen some nice images come out of it online.
Canon 400: buy the 2.0x instead. Or the 300+1.4x. The 300 has slightly faster AF, and cna be used with or without teleconverter, so you have a bit more flexibility for about the same price. But that 70-200 is a killer lens. the 400 won't get you better images.
The 7d+70-200+2.0x is (IMHO) the best overall bird/critter lens for canon these days. I recommend the 100-400 as the entry level because it's half the cost, but you already own the 70-200 so the big hunk of money is already spent. Before you consider going longer than 400mm, work with that combo and how figure out how much you can crop -- it's a lot cheaper to buy a good modern body with enough megapixels you can crop than it is to buy a 600mm bazooka to get that extra distance. This combo has convinced me not to buy a 500mm, since I can crop effectively into that distance.
Rent a 7d. Rent a 2.0X tele III. Try it out. You'll probably end up buying that as your upgrade.
Another opinion: it's what Art Morris uses. If it's good enough for him...
Originally by user705. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user705
13y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
The strongest options from your list are the EF 400mm f/5.6L or a 2x teleconverter on your 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II.
If you want the best pure 400mm wildlife lens near this budget, the 400mm f/5.6L is the safest pick. Community feedback says it gives the fastest autofocus and the best image quality at 400mm, especially for birds and other moving subjects.
Your 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II also works surprisingly well with the Canon 2x teleconverter, producing a very usable 400mm f/5.6 setup. It may be a little softer than the 400mm prime, especially at the edges, and AF won’t be as snappy, but it has a major real-world advantage: image stabilization. Handheld, that can matter a lot.
So the trade-off is simple:
- 400mm f/5.6L: best sharpness and AF speed
- 70-200 II + 2x: very good quality, more flexible, plus IS
A crop body helps by putting more pixels on the subject than a full-frame crop, but it doesn’t replace having a strong long lens.
For hobby wildlife on a budget, choose the 400mm f/5.6L if birds/action are the priority; choose the 2x extender if you want to spend less and keep versatility.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI13y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why does my APS-C Canon still show 400mm with a 70-200mm and 2x extender?
Should I use a 2x extender on a Canon 70-200mm f/4L or buy a 100-400mm for wildlife on an EOS 30D?
Choosing a telephoto lens for bird and wildlife photography with a Canon 600D
Should I buy a Canon 5D Mark II body only, or get it with a lens kit if I already own 18-55 and 70-300 lenses?
Canon 6D vs 5D Mark II for macro, landscapes, and occasional wildlife