7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

Started 2 months ago | Discussions
Steve Balcombe Forum Pro • Posts: 13,642
7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO
5

No, I haven't posted in the wrong forum. I just wanted to announce that the cash for a 400 DO which I had budgeted for this year - to be bought when the 7D3 finally appears - has been reallocated to the fund for an R5 + RF 100-500L.

At least I think it has...

Chris Mak Senior Member • Posts: 2,396
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO
1

Steve Balcombe wrote:

No, I haven't posted in the wrong forum. I just wanted to announce that the cash for a 400 DO which I had budgeted for this year - to be bought when the 7D3 finally appears - has been reallocated to the fund for an R5 + RF 100-500L.

At least I think it has...

I briefly used the 400DOII with 1.4TC on the EOS-R. No compromise in functionality at all. So it will undoubtedly work seamless on the coming EOS-R5. But an EOS-R5 is full frame and will cost more than double of what a 7DIII would cost. The RF100-500L will get awefully dark with a tc, so practically limited to 500mm. The 400DOII is still f5.6 at 560mm, and f8 at 800mm.

So still hoping for a 7DIII, but it will 99% sure be mirrorless when it comes. The 5DV also turned out to be mirrorless.

 Chris Mak's gear list:Chris Mak's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Mark II Sony a7R II Nikon D500 Canon Extender EF 1.4x III Canon Extender EF 2x III +6 more
bobito CT
bobito CT Forum Member • Posts: 61
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO
1

The super telephoto RF primes are supposed to be out this year, perhaps wait for that?

I really don't care if if the 7dm2 replacement is mirrorless or not, but Canon does need to release a high end 30mp crop sensor camera at some point.  The 90D can't be the replacement for the 7dm2...

 bobito CT's gear list:bobito CT's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 35mm F2.0 Canon Extender EF 1.4x II Canon EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS STM Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II
an_also
an_also Regular Member • Posts: 357
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO
3

Steve Balcombe wrote:

No, I haven't posted in the wrong forum. I just wanted to announce that the cash for a 400 DO which I had budgeted for this year - to be bought when the 7D3 finally appears - has been reallocated to the fund for an R5 + RF 100-500L.

At least I think it has...

I'm not going to try to convince you what you should do BUT I will say that it might be a mistake to go with a lesser lens in the 100-500 over the F4 DO II. The low light capabilities and OOF background separation of the DO II has been invaluable to me. I used to have the 100-400 II and I found that in lower light the 5.6 struggled. It was great with good light.

(Fully realize that I also don't know what you are planning to shoot and at what time but if you need a powerhouse when there is a lack of light, the F4 DO II is the right choice regardless of the body)

MY 2 cents.

 an_also's gear list:an_also's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 400mm F4 DO IS II USM Canon EOS M5 Canon Extender EF 1.4x III Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +4 more
RDM5546 Regular Member • Posts: 311
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

I love my 7D MkII and 5D mk IV and EOS R. The EOS is more able to replace the 5D than 7D for shure. I have tried the EOS R with the 1.6X crop factor but I find I prefer to shoot FF because the cropped mode does very little to improve the outcome if you do post processing.

The EOS R is my best focussing body indoors. My 5D optical viewfinder is my preference when the subject is moving fast. My 7D gives the best reach when using cropped images.

The EOR R5 may replace all three cameras with more pixels and higher speed than the EOS R. I am hoping there will be better and a faster viewfinder without blackouts too. This EOS R may bring FF crop-able images to a body with the 7D speed and in even better version of the focus tracking of the EOS R .

 RDM5546's gear list:RDM5546's gear list
Canon G5 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R +29 more
OP Steve Balcombe Forum Pro • Posts: 13,642
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

Chris Mak wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

No, I haven't posted in the wrong forum. I just wanted to announce that the cash for a 400 DO which I had budgeted for this year - to be bought when the 7D3 finally appears - has been reallocated to the fund for an R5 + RF 100-500L.

At least I think it has...

I briefly used the 400DOII with 1.4TC on the EOS-R. No compromise in functionality at all. So it will undoubtedly work seamless on the coming EOS-R5. But an EOS-R5 is full frame and will cost more than double of what a 7DIII would cost.

The idea is to put more cash into the body, with a less expensive lens, instead of more cash into the lens on the cheaper body. Total should be in the same ball park.

The RF100-500L will get awefully dark with a tc, so practically limited to 500mm. The 400DOII is still f5.6 at 560mm, and f8 at 800mm.

I wouldn't use a TC on the 100-500, just as I don't normally use a TC on my 100-400 now (maybe occasionally on the 5D4 but not on the crop bodies).

Please bear in mind I'm not necessarily looking for the most powerful option here - the R5 and the 400 DO together would break the budget, it has to be either/or. It's more a case of which is the best compromise, looking forward.

As a frequent bird photographer, the amount of detail I can record is important. Obviously the 600/4L IS III is going to trounce anything else, but here I'm looking for something smaller and lighter, and with the either/or proviso mentioned above. It's Friday evening with a wet weekend ahead, so I did a little calculation using that well-known metric of 'pixels/bird', based on a 10 cm subject at 4 metres. The number of (linear) pixels recorded for the 10 cm subject is as below. I'll start with the big lens just to give us a point of reference:

600 mm on 90D (my densest sensor) - 4682 pixels/bird.

600 mm on 5D4 (my favourite sensor) - 2800 pixels/bird

600 mm plus 1.4x on 5D4 (my regular big lens setup) - 3920 pixels/bird

Ok, moving on to possible smaller setups:

400 mm (100-400 or 400 DO) on 90D - 3121 pixels/bird

400 DO + 1.4x on 90D (same as 7D3?) - 4369 pixels/bird

400 mm on 5D4 - only 1867 pixels/bird but a very nice walk-around setup

400 mm + 1.4x on 5D4 (nice if it's a 400 DO, marginal if it's a 100-400) - 2613 pixels/bird

And last but by no means least, the new option:

100-500 at 500 mm on R5 (assuming 8100 x 5400 px) - 2812 pixels/bird.

I fully, 100%, totally understand that pixels/bird is not the be-all and end-all, it's just one part of the package. But 2812 px/b is a very long way short of the 4369 px/b that the 400 DO + 1.4x would achieve on a likely 7D3, and it's even 10% behind the 3121 of the bare 400 on the same sensor. Do I want to accept that trade-off against the undoubted benefits in other respects of the R5 with a dedicated RF mount telezoom?

So still hoping for a 7DIII, but it will 99% sure be mirrorless when it comes. The 5DV also turned out to be mirrorless.

For the life of me I can't work out what Canon is going to do with high-end crop. EOS M isn't up to the job, and there is not the slightest hint of a crop sensor RF mount body à la Nikon Z50. The 90D isn't a proper 7D3 substitute, but it could be Canon's way of keeping that segment ticking over for a while longer. What a waste of a cracking good sensor if it turns out to be a dead end.

Tannin Senior Member • Posts: 1,333
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO
1

Steve Balcombe wrote:

The idea is to put more cash into the body, with a less expensive lens, instead of more cash into the lens on the cheaper body. Total should be in the same ball park.

Hmmm ... That is a really bad idea. Bodies come and go and last a few years. Lenses last far, far longer. Always put the main part of your budget into lenses.

Example: In 2006 I bought a 20D and a 500/4. The 20D got replaced by a 40D, 50D, 1D III, 7D, 1D IV, and 7D II before I replaced the 500/4 with a 600/4 II. That's seven bodies and just one lens. OK, that is an extreme example, but you can quite reasonably expect to go through three or four bodies per lens. This holds true whether you are a frequent upgrader or tend to keep your stuff a long time.

Get the best lens you can (not an f/7.1 cheapie) and whatever body you can afford after paying for the lens. The lens will serve you well for many, many years.

 Tannin's gear list:Tannin's gear list
Canon G9 X II Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV +11 more
RDM5546 Regular Member • Posts: 311
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

I suggest you wait until the late summer because you likely would want the R5 rather the the EOS R for shooting with a 400mm lens.   There will be more RF lenses next year.  Maybe even an RF 400/4 DO.

I also have f5.6 at 400mm and I love the lens when the sun is out strong.  High speed, stablized and all are great but in dim light the ISO is forced higher.    I have a big sigma

150-650mm zoom and again it is not good when conditions are dim.  I would love to have f4 but I will and see what Canon does in RF telephotos a couple of year before  I buy a new expensive telephoto or any other EF lenses.  I already have 25 or more lovely EF lenses bought over the past twenty years.   My new money is going after a faster mirrorless Canon camera.

 RDM5546's gear list:RDM5546's gear list
Canon G5 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R +29 more
OP Steve Balcombe Forum Pro • Posts: 13,642
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

RDM5546 wrote:

I suggest you wait until the late summer because you likely would want the R5 rather the the EOS R for shooting with a 400mm lens.

Absolutely, that's what I've been talking about.

There will be more RF lenses next year. Maybe even an RF 400/4 DO.

I also have f5.6 at 400mm and I love the lens when the sun is out strong. High speed, stablized and all are great but in dim light the ISO is forced higher. I have a big sigma

150-650mm zoom and again it is not good when conditions are dim. I would love to have f4 but I will and see what Canon does in RF telephotos a couple of year before I buy a new expensive telephoto or any other EF lenses. I already have 25 or more lovely EF lenses bought over the past twenty years. My new money is going after a faster mirrorless Canon camera.

There's lot's of context here. Like yourself have a collection built up over time, which now runs to three bodies (5D4/90D/7D2) and 15+ lenses, mostly Ls. This includes a 600/4L IS III which I love, although it's a bit of a love/hate relationship because it is so flippin' big. My quest is to improve on my lightweight alternative which is currently the 100-400L II, potentially on any of the bodies.

The combination in my subject line would be a stunning solution, but like so many people I'm thinking that the R5 might be good enough to justify the leap into mirrorless, and if so I could pair it with the 100-500 rather than just adapting the 100-400. Budget-wise that is likely to be similar to, in fact less than, the 7D3 plus 400 DO II, and while it might not be quite as powerful, it gets me into mirrorless and perhaps the timing is right for that.

Also BTW - the R5 and 100-500 are real, the 7D3 is not even a rumour yet!!

RDM5546 Regular Member • Posts: 311
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

Steve Balcombe wrote:

RDM5546 wrote:

I suggest you wait until the late summer because you likely would want the R5 rather the the EOS R for shooting with a 400mm lens.

Absolutely, that's what I've been talking about.

There will be more RF lenses next year. Maybe even an RF 400/4 DO.

I also have f5.6 at 400mm and I love the lens when the sun is out strong. High speed, stablized and all are great but in dim light the ISO is forced higher. I have a big sigma

150-650mm zoom and again it is not good when conditions are dim. I would love to have f4 but I will and see what Canon does in RF telephotos a couple of year before I buy a new expensive telephoto or any other EF lenses. I already have 25 or more lovely EF lenses bought over the past twenty years. My new money is going after a faster mirrorless Canon camera.

There's lot's of context here. Like yourself have a collection built up over time, which now runs to three bodies (5D4/90D/7D2) and 15+ lenses, mostly Ls. This includes a 600/4L IS III which I love, although it's a bit of a love/hate relationship because it is so flippin' big. My quest is to improve on my lightweight alternative which is currently the 100-400L II, potentially on any of the bodies.

The combination in my subject line would be a stunning solution, but like so many people I'm thinking that the R5 might be good enough to justify the leap into mirrorless, and if so I could pair it with the 100-500 rather than just adapting the 100-400. Budget-wise that is likely to be similar to, in fact less than, the 7D3 plus 400 DO II, and while it might not be quite as powerful, it gets me into mirrorless and perhaps the timing is right for that.

Also BTW - the R5 and 100-500 are real, the 7D3 is not even a rumour yet!!

Quite true.  You may never be able to buy a 7D3.   The 7D2 is old enough that under different conditions it would be coming now. I think the APS-C format is dying.  It is far easier to crop in post processing with good results using a FF sensor.  If the resolution is 45megapixels it puts nearly 20 megapixels on the APS-C footprint of the image so the range extension is almost as good as with the 7D2.   The the speed of the R5 may be similar to the 7D2.  The only concern is the viewfinder of the R5 is an EVF and not an optical finder.  The R5 will be brighter and that is plus.  The R5 though only changes views every frame (12fps) so you are a bird in flight flying right at you at high speed (like a low flying duck) would on be seen in twelve different locations every second.   The image of the duck is jerky making exact tracking a little more difficult.  With the EOS R the AF Servo mode take time and slow the 5fps down to close to 3 fps and this is more jerky than 12 fps where it is minor. Panning fast moving object is less difficult with the 7D because it shows you the motion of the bird continuously except when the mirror goes up at speeds which may be around 8 fps in actual shooting.  It is not pretty but optical works,  I have not tried the R5 viewfinder put on paper it looks similar to me to the Sony A9 which many people say works and is better than DSLRs  at bird shooting.  The mirror focus sensors are much more spread across to image a some are closer to the edge that DSLRs like the 7D and EOS 5D.  In the DSLRs the focus sensors are much closer to the center.

For fast moving objects the focus at the edge matter because some shots are taken with the subject close the edge.

Every shooting situation is a little different but take pictures of people or groups near the camera is one of the most common situtations. The EOS R is excellent in getting a good focus in these situations as are most mirrorless cameras.  The EVF is also handy in determining the fine points of setting the exposure right and using exposure compensation to correct before you snap the picture.  These are the cameras very strong points.   Hopefully the R5 will speed things up and do better job in high action shooting.

 RDM5546's gear list:RDM5546's gear list
Canon G5 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R +29 more
Bhotoz Senior Member • Posts: 1,278
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

RDM5546 wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

RDM5546 wrote:

I suggest you wait until the late summer because you likely would want the R5 rather the the EOS R for shooting with a 400mm lens.

Absolutely, that's what I've been talking about.

There will be more RF lenses next year. Maybe even an RF 400/4 DO.

I also have f5.6 at 400mm and I love the lens when the sun is out strong. High speed, stablized and all are great but in dim light the ISO is forced higher. I have a big sigma

150-650mm zoom and again it is not good when conditions are dim. I would love to have f4 but I will and see what Canon does in RF telephotos a couple of year before I buy a new expensive telephoto or any other EF lenses. I already have 25 or more lovely EF lenses bought over the past twenty years. My new money is going after a faster mirrorless Canon camera.

There's lot's of context here. Like yourself have a collection built up over time, which now runs to three bodies (5D4/90D/7D2) and 15+ lenses, mostly Ls. This includes a 600/4L IS III which I love, although it's a bit of a love/hate relationship because it is so flippin' big. My quest is to improve on my lightweight alternative which is currently the 100-400L II, potentially on any of the bodies.

The combination in my subject line would be a stunning solution, but like so many people I'm thinking that the R5 might be good enough to justify the leap into mirrorless, and if so I could pair it with the 100-500 rather than just adapting the 100-400. Budget-wise that is likely to be similar to, in fact less than, the 7D3 plus 400 DO II, and while it might not be quite as powerful, it gets me into mirrorless and perhaps the timing is right for that.

Also BTW - the R5 and 100-500 are real, the 7D3 is not even a rumour yet!!

Quite true. You may never be able to buy a 7D3. The 7D2 is old enough that under different conditions it would be coming now. I think the APS-C format is dying. It is far easier to crop in post processing with good results using a FF sensor. If the resolution is 45megapixels it puts nearly 20 megapixels on the APS-C footprint of the image so the range extension is almost as good as with the 7D2. The the speed of the R5 may be similar to the 7D2. The only concern is the viewfinder of the R5 is an EVF and not an optical finder. The R5 will be brighter and that is plus. The R5 though only changes views every frame (12fps) so you are a bird in flight flying right at you at high speed (like a low flying duck) would on be seen in twelve different locations every second. The image of the duck is jerky making exact tracking a little more difficult. With the EOS R the AF Servo mode take time and slow the 5fps down to close to 3 fps and this is more jerky than 12 fps where it is minor. Panning fast moving object is less difficult with the 7D because it shows you the motion of the bird continuously except when the mirror goes up at speeds which may be around 8 fps in actual shooting. It is not pretty but optical works, I have not tried the R5 viewfinder put on paper it looks similar to me to the Sony A9 which many people say works and is better than DSLRs at bird shooting. The mirror focus sensors are much more spread across to image a some are closer to the edge that DSLRs like the 7D and EOS 5D. In the DSLRs the focus sensors are much closer to the center.

For fast moving objects the focus at the edge matter because some shots are taken with the subject close the edge.

Every shooting situation is a little different but take pictures of people or groups near the camera is one of the most common situtations. The EOS R is excellent in getting a good focus in these situations as are most mirrorless cameras. The EVF is also handy in determining the fine points of setting the exposure right and using exposure compensation to correct before you snap the picture. These are the cameras very strong points. Hopefully the R5 will speed things up and do better job in high action shooting.

I'm also a potential 7d2 to R5 switcher. (I already have R and some RF-lenses ) But. Unfortunately the price of R5 will be much higher than "7d3" or "R7" would be. Interesting to see what's Canon's plan when EF-s mount is dead. I don't think aps-c will die, though...

OP Steve Balcombe Forum Pro • Posts: 13,642
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

RDM5546 wrote:

The R5 though only changes views every frame (12fps) so you are a bird in flight flying right at you at high speed (like a low flying duck) would on be seen in twelve different locations every second. The image of the duck is jerky making exact tracking a little more difficult.

You state that as fact, but I don't think we have any information about the viewfinder, do we? Nor about the sensor technology which is also crucial to this.

The Sony A9 has an uninterrupted viewfinder display in electronic shutter mode, and while I've never used one in a real world situation I have had a demo and it's very impressive. The A9II, which I've not yet tried out, maintains a 60 fps uninterrupted viewfinder display while shooting, again in electronic shutter mode. I don't know how well it performs in mechanical shutter mode - maybe someone can fill in the detail on this?

Hopefully Canon will have achieved something similar - if not that would be a big disappointment given the fanfare around the R5.

RDM5546 Regular Member • Posts: 311
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

Bhotoz wrote:

RDM5546 wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

RDM5546 wrote:

I suggest you wait until the late summer because you likely would want the R5 rather the the EOS R for shooting with a 400mm lens.

Absolutely, that's what I've been talking about.

There will be more RF lenses next year. Maybe even an RF 400/4 DO.

I also have f5.6 at 400mm and I love the lens when the sun is out strong. High speed, stablized and all are great but in dim light the ISO is forced higher. I have a big sigma

150-650mm zoom and again it is not good when conditions are dim. I would love to have f4 but I will and see what Canon does in RF telephotos a couple of year before I buy a new expensive telephoto or any other EF lenses. I already have 25 or more lovely EF lenses bought over the past twenty years. My new money is going after a faster mirrorless Canon camera.

There's lot's of context here. Like yourself have a collection built up over time, which now runs to three bodies (5D4/90D/7D2) and 15+ lenses, mostly Ls. This includes a 600/4L IS III which I love, although it's a bit of a love/hate relationship because it is so flippin' big. My quest is to improve on my lightweight alternative which is currently the 100-400L II, potentially on any of the bodies.

The combination in my subject line would be a stunning solution, but like so many people I'm thinking that the R5 might be good enough to justify the leap into mirrorless, and if so I could pair it with the 100-500 rather than just adapting the 100-400. Budget-wise that is likely to be similar to, in fact less than, the 7D3 plus 400 DO II, and while it might not be quite as powerful, it gets me into mirrorless and perhaps the timing is right for that.

Also BTW - the R5 and 100-500 are real, the 7D3 is not even a rumour yet!!

Quite true. You may never be able to buy a 7D3. The 7D2 is old enough that under different conditions it would be coming now. I think the APS-C format is dying. It is far easier to crop in post processing with good results using a FF sensor. If the resolution is 45megapixels it puts nearly 20 megapixels on the APS-C footprint of the image so the range extension is almost as good as with the 7D2. The the speed of the R5 may be similar to the 7D2. The only concern is the viewfinder of the R5 is an EVF and not an optical finder. The R5 will be brighter and that is plus. The R5 though only changes views every frame (12fps) so you are a bird in flight flying right at you at high speed (like a low flying duck) would on be seen in twelve different locations every second. The image of the duck is jerky making exact tracking a little more difficult. With the EOS R the AF Servo mode take time and slow the 5fps down to close to 3 fps and this is more jerky than 12 fps where it is minor. Panning fast moving object is less difficult with the 7D because it shows you the motion of the bird continuously except when the mirror goes up at speeds which may be around 8 fps in actual shooting. It is not pretty but optical works, I have not tried the R5 viewfinder put on paper it looks similar to me to the Sony A9 which many people say works and is better than DSLRs at bird shooting. The mirror focus sensors are much more spread across to image a some are closer to the edge that DSLRs like the 7D and EOS 5D. In the DSLRs the focus sensors are much closer to the center.

For fast moving objects the focus at the edge matter because some shots are taken with the subject close the edge.

Every shooting situation is a little different but take pictures of people or groups near the camera is one of the most common situtations. The EOS R is excellent in getting a good focus in these situations as are most mirrorless cameras. The EVF is also handy in determining the fine points of setting the exposure right and using exposure compensation to correct before you snap the picture. These are the cameras very strong points. Hopefully the R5 will speed things up and do better job in high action shooting.

I'm also a potential 7d2 to R5 switcher. (I already have R and some RF-lenses ) But. Unfortunately the price of R5 will be much higher than "7d3" or "R7" would be. Interesting to see what's Canon's plan when EF-s mount is dead. I don't think aps-c will die, though...

Yes it will be more than $3000 but how much more depends on their competitive line up now in development. If an R1D can be made with now current technology and rolled next year that will soft the pricing need for the R5 if it truly lives up to the dreams from it's specs. They need market penetration now. Not next year. The need to drive lenses sales which is much more money than bodies. I have over 25 EF lenses and four RF lenses. Look at the money! I only have four bodies and two were not expensive (< $2K).

 RDM5546's gear list:RDM5546's gear list
Canon G5 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R +29 more
RDM5546 Regular Member • Posts: 311
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

If there are two sensors, one of the sensors could go at a imaging update speed than the one that is faster than the recorded data such at 120Hz and this would greatly reduce the delay. Electronic images sensor to have some delay in generating their image which is slower that the view when availbe through a pure optical path.

If the view is identical to that of the sensor and there is no image splitter then the viewfinder is collocated with that of the recorded image. I know there is one one image sensor in their chip and not two. They are using the date from the same digtial stream as the recorded image in a single lens WSYWIG mirrorless camera.

There being no sensor blackout means that the display likely has two viewable storage buffers somewhere in a silicon chip so that the old image is replace by the new image in nearly no time (maybe microseconds). Double buffering the image to be written while the other buffer is diplaying. Switching between buffers can happen nearly instantly.

Blackout free image displays are not a new invention of the Sony cameras. They have bee around in other image displays for many decades and are they are the subject of many patents not owned by Sony well known to display designers.

I am convinced that the A9 is black out free. I do doubt the image updates more frequently that the image stored because this requires a source the image other that the data image being stored.

That would quite a different story because the camera would need a place to obtain this more frequently produced image. In DLSRs, by comparison, there is only an optical path via a flipping mirror to the viewfinder. When you do see the field of the image through the lens you have a 100% current view with no electronic delays.

I feel confident in this for many reasons. Every move that you see of the subject reaches your eye in nanoseconds after the subject moved. Of course there some blackout  of the image periodically made by a mirror movement,

In the optical viewfinder case, there is approximately 1 nanosecond per foot for every foot the subject in front of the the lens.   This is caused by the speed of light in air.   This would amount 50 nanoseconds for a subject fifty feet away.

The A9 EVF has an subject image delay between nearly zero and 50 milliseconds when shooting at 20fps vary with the time in the shooting cycle.   This amount to an average delay of 25 milliseconds. When shooting at 12 fps mechanical shutter the delay would be nearly 0-83.3 milliseconds with an average delay of 41.6 milliseconds. This would be a noticeably  jerky image if the subject is moving very fast and you are using the mechanical shutter.

 RDM5546's gear list:RDM5546's gear list
Canon G5 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R +29 more
RDM5546 Regular Member • Posts: 311
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

Steve Balcombe wrote:

Chris Mak wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

No, I haven't posted in the wrong forum. I just wanted to announce that the cash for a 400 DO which I had budgeted for this year - to be bought when the 7D3 finally appears - has been reallocated to the fund for an R5 + RF 100-500L.

At least I think it has...

I briefly used the 400DOII with 1.4TC on the EOS-R. No compromise in functionality at all. So it will undoubtedly work seamless on the coming EOS-R5. But an EOS-R5 is full frame and will cost more than double of what a 7DIII would cost.

The idea is to put more cash into the body, with a less expensive lens, instead of more cash into the lens on the cheaper body. Total should be in the same ball park.

The RF100-500L will get awefully dark with a tc, so practically limited to 500mm. The 400DOII is still f5.6 at 560mm, and f8 at 800mm.

I wouldn't use a TC on the 100-500, just as I don't normally use a TC on my 100-400 now (maybe occasionally on the 5D4 but not on the crop bodies).

Please bear in mind I'm not necessarily looking for the most powerful option here - the R5 and the 400 DO together would break the budget, it has to be either/or. It's more a case of which is the best compromise, looking forward.

As a frequent bird photographer, the amount of detail I can record is important. Obviously the 600/4L IS III is going to trounce anything else, but here I'm looking for something smaller and lighter, and with the either/or proviso mentioned above. It's Friday evening with a wet weekend ahead, so I did a little calculation using that well-known metric of 'pixels/bird', based on a 10 cm subject at 4 metres. The number of (linear) pixels recorded for the 10 cm subject is as below. I'll start with the big lens just to give us a point of reference:

600 mm on 90D (my densest sensor) - 4682 pixels/bird.

600 mm on 5D4 (my favourite sensor) - 2800 pixels/bird

600 mm plus 1.4x on 5D4 (my regular big lens setup) - 3920 pixels/bird

Ok, moving on to possible smaller setups:

400 mm (100-400 or 400 DO) on 90D - 3121 pixels/bird

400 DO + 1.4x on 90D (same as 7D3?) - 4369 pixels/bird

400 mm on 5D4 - only 1867 pixels/bird but a very nice walk-around setup

400 mm + 1.4x on 5D4 (nice if it's a 400 DO, marginal if it's a 100-400) - 2613 pixels/bird

And last but by no means least, the new option:

100-500 at 500 mm on R5 (assuming 8100 x 5400 px) - 2812 pixels/bird.

I fully, 100%, totally understand that pixels/bird is not the be-all and end-all, it's just one part of the package. But 2812 px/b is a very long way short of the 4369 px/b that the 400 DO + 1.4x would achieve on a likely 7D3, and it's even 10% behind the 3121 of the bare 400 on the same sensor. Do I want to accept that trade-off against the undoubted benefits in other respects of the R5 with a dedicated RF mount telezoom?

So still hoping for a 7DIII, but it will 99% sure be mirrorless when it comes. The 5DV also turned out to be mirrorless.

For the life of me I can't work out what Canon is going to do with high-end crop. EOS M isn't up to the job, and there is not the slightest hint of a crop sensor RF mount body à la Nikon Z50. The 90D isn't a proper 7D3 substitute, but it could be Canon's way of keeping that segment ticking over for a while longer. What a waste of a cracking good sensor if it turns out to be a dead end.

You guys must lift weights. That lens is 4.63 lbs!!  I would be monopod bound for shure but some saying they can shoot hand held with this lens.   Don't get me wrong I would love to have the f4.0 lens.   I currently have a 4.0lb  Sigma 150-600mm but for me it is monopod only.  I hate the f6.3 but thankfully it does focus with my bodies.   I can use this lens in the same situations for shooting as I can the 3.6 lb EF 100-400f3.5-5.6L II lens.  It is only ten percent lighter but a little shorter and small as well and much easier to hand hold and pan and shoot.  This makes it one of my go-to lenses.   The EF 400 looks more like the size and little more weight than my  Sigma which nice but monopod bound.

 RDM5546's gear list:RDM5546's gear list
Canon G5 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R +29 more
OP Steve Balcombe Forum Pro • Posts: 13,642
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

RDM5546 wrote:

You guys must lift weights. That lens is 4.63 lbs!! I would be monopod bound for shure but some saying they can shoot hand held with this lens. Don't get me wrong I would love to have the f4.0 lens. I currently have a 4.0lb Sigma 150-600mm but for me it is monopod only.

What's "monopod only" for one person is hand-holdable all day for another - and no, I don't work out! It's partly strength, but a lot of it is just getting used to handling it. I find having a good shoulder strap makes a big difference, because I'm only using precious muscle power when actually shooting.

The Sigma 150-600 C is 1,830 g (which is 4.03 lb) but it's longer and more front-heavy than the 400 DO II so I would think they are probably fairly similar in terms of hand-holdability (or not).

The 100-400L II is only 1,570 g and easy to hand-hold for extended periods - I'm expecting the RF 100-500L to be fairly similar. Also it should fit in a backpack fairly easily for longer walks which is a big advantage.

RDM5546 Regular Member • Posts: 311
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

No weight lifting practice for you.  I am impressed.  I might have something to do with my being a little older more decrepit.  Keep young and keep shooting with big lenses.

 RDM5546's gear list:RDM5546's gear list
Canon G5 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R +29 more
Chris Mak Senior Member • Posts: 2,396
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

Steve Balcombe wrote:

RDM5546 wrote:

You guys must lift weights. That lens is 4.63 lbs!! I would be monopod bound for shure but some saying they can shoot hand held with this lens. Don't get me wrong I would love to have the f4.0 lens. I currently have a 4.0lb Sigma 150-600mm but for me it is monopod only.

What's "monopod only" for one person is hand-holdable all day for another - and no, I don't work out! It's partly strength, but a lot of it is just getting used to handling it.

+1 it's a matter of getting used to it. I shot a 3.1kg prime with 1.4tc handheld for years, so the 400DOII is a fairly lightweight lens for me. I also have the Nikon 500PF, but prefer handholding the 400DOII with 1.4TC, because the weight helps stabilize. You do need to use a strap to carry though, in order to prevent fatique, but after getting used to it, the 400DOII should be a lens that you can shoot handheld, especially with its superb IS.

I find having a good shoulder strap makes a big difference, because I'm only using precious muscle power when actually shooting.

The Sigma 150-600 C is 1,830 g (which is 4.03 lb) but it's longer and more front-heavy than the 400 DO II so I would think they are probably fairly similar in terms of hand-holdability (or not).

The 100-400L II is only 1,570 g and easy to hand-hold for extended periods - I'm expecting the RF 100-500L to be fairly similar. Also it should fit in a backpack fairly easily for longer walks which is a big advantage.

 Chris Mak's gear list:Chris Mak's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Mark II Sony a7R II Nikon D500 Canon Extender EF 1.4x III Canon Extender EF 2x III +6 more
RDM5546 Regular Member • Posts: 311
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

Chris Mak wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

RDM5546 wrote:

You guys must lift weights. That lens is 4.63 lbs!! I would be monopod bound for shure but some saying they can shoot hand held with this lens. Don't get me wrong I would love to have the f4.0 lens. I currently have a 4.0lb Sigma 150-600mm but for me it is monopod only.

What's "monopod only" for one person is hand-holdable all day for another - and no, I don't work out! It's partly strength, but a lot of it is just getting used to handling it.

+1 it's a matter of getting used to it. I shot a 3.1kg prime with 1.4tc handheld for years, so the 400DOII is a fairly lightweight lens for me. I also have the Nikon 500PF, but prefer handholding the 400DOII with 1.4TC, because the weight helps stabilize. You do need to use a strap to carry though, in order to prevent fatique, but after getting used to it, the 400DOII should be a lens that you can shoot handheld, especially with its superb IS.

I find having a good shoulder strap makes a big difference, because I'm only using precious muscle power when actually shooting.

The Sigma 150-600 C is 1,830 g (which is 4.03 lb) but it's longer and more front-heavy than the 400 DO II so I would think they are probably fairly similar in terms of hand-holdability (or not).

The 100-400L II is only 1,570 g and easy to hand-hold for extended periods - I'm expecting the RF 100-500L to be fairly similar. Also it should fit in a backpack fairly easily for longer walks which is a big advantage.

You do tempt me to try one out!!  A few weights wouldn't hurt me either.

 RDM5546's gear list:RDM5546's gear list
Canon G5 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R +29 more
Dexter75 Senior Member • Posts: 2,893
Re: 7D Mark III plus EF 400/4 DO

Steve Balcombe wrote:

No, I haven't posted in the wrong forum. I just wanted to announce that the cash for a 400 DO which I had budgeted for this year - to be bought when the 7D3 finally appears - has been reallocated to the fund for an R5 + RF 100-500L.

At least I think it has...

Good call because I seriously doubt there will be a 7D III, just like I seriously doubt there will be a 6D III. The 5D V may very well be the last DSLR Canon makes.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads