Upgrading from a Rebel T3i to T6s~Upgrade the lens? Wildlife shooting is the goal.

SeeTheWorld wrote:

AdriaanMeijer wrote:

SeeTheWorld wrote:

I'm a hobbyist who shoots landscapes, macro and wildlife. I'm about to upgrade the T3i to T6s. I like the swivel touch-screen and higher megapixels. So the question is, do I also upgrade the lens? I'm planning to keep my 10-22 mm for landscapes, and I have the original 70-300 f4-5.6 mm non-L, which I took to Africa for some nice wildlife shots. In three weeks we head to Yellowstone where I hope to get some great wildlife opportunities.
With the higher megapixels of the new camera I'll be able to crop more, so I don't think I need more than a 300 mm. But, would the upgrade in camera warrant an upgrade in lens? Should I also upgrade the 70-300 f4-5.6 lens to the 70-300 f4-5.6 L?

Well, would you want/need another lens, sounds more of a question to ask. The newer sensor will give more MP (megapixels) and better noise ratios in lower light. Is that enough to 'crop more'?
Perhaps a bit, but I'd expect not much. Also in cropping all imperfections will be more visible. This might be lens flaws, but I'd expect other imperfections (like focus or camera shake or subject shake) to pop up first. These can be worked at, improving skills.

All-n-all I would not expect too much from 'cropping more'.

The fact that you are happy with the results of your lenses ('some nice wildlife shots') makes me thinking to advise you to be reluctant in buying an other lens. And if you'd go for an upgrade, then the question is what for? more reach? more IQ? Better IS? faster aperture? For birding lenses reaching to at least 400mm or more are desirable.

On keeping your other body: I am very happy to be able to carry two bodies, each with another lens. Very handy and fast when the situation asks for it.

And do consider weight of equipment when walking with your lenses.

Adriana,

Thank you for the clear and witty response. Why would I change lenses? For a better keep ratio. I know 400 is better for BIF. But, I'm too constricted when carrying big lenses. So, I count on megapixels. I hear you saying megapixels aren't necessarily the answer. That's why one of my considerations is looking at the non-L new 70-300 lens. I think is has an improved IS, and it is not as heavy as the L. The ideal would be a light 2.8 400 mm with IS, but that hasn't been invented yet. I'm glad to hear your comments on dual body. I think a Rick Steves day pack will help with the added weight. I'm actually very excited by the prospect of not having to change lenses in a pinch. Any thoughts on the 70-300 II? Thanks again.
Mary
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world . . ." Margaret Mead

Sorry Adriaan.  Spell check mangeled your name.