How should I resolve my birding GAS?

Hi all. 
I have a dilemma to solve. I've been trying to get some nice shots of birds and I'm pushing the limits of what I can achieve with my M6 + EF-S 55-250 IS + Rexley 2X TC. The AF on the M6 isn't really quick enough and often hunts when pointed skyward.

I inherited an EOS R + 24-105 L from a company I was working for as part of the severance deal when they unexpectedly had to cancel the project I was involved with. The AF is great, but I get a mandatory crop to 12MP if I mount the EF-S 55-250 IS to it.

I'm between jobs at the moment so funds are limited, but I have time to be out trying to get nice shots. What to do? I've sold some cameras and lenses I'm not using and have a budget of around £600.

I could sell the M6 and upgrade to a M6ii or M50ii for better IS, and have a couple of hundred left over towards a better lens.

I could buy an RF 100-400 and save for a RF TC

I could buy a beat-up EF mount Sigma 100-500 and use it solo or with my Rexley 2xTC at high f-stops on the EOS R or M6

I could treat my wants for better bird shots as a passing phase and buy a 32 f/1.4 EF-M prime.

Please offer some advice on AF at higher f-stops and tick a box in the poll below.
Will I get much better AF and IS with a dedicated RF zoom?
WIll an older EF lens do the job and give me more flexibility?

Here are a few of the shots I've got in the last week with my current set-up to help you decide whether I could be a better birder with a better lens, or whether I should just scale back my ambition and concentrate more on other photograhy subjects.

User1303423862 wrote:

Hi all.
I have a dilemma to solve. I've been trying to get some nice shots of birds and I'm pushing the limits of what I can achieve with my M6 + EF-S 55-250 IS + Rexley 2X TC. The AF on the M6 isn't really quick enough and often hunts when pointed skyward.

I inherited an EOS R + 24-105 L from a company I was working for as part of the severance deal when they unexpectedly had to cancel the project I was involved with. The AF is great, but I get a mandatory crop to 12MP if I mount the EF-S 55-250 IS to it.

I'm between jobs at the moment so funds are limited, but I have time to be out trying to get nice shots. What to do? I've sold some cameras and lenses I'm not using and have a budget of around £600.

I could sell the M6 and upgrade to a M6ii or M50ii for better IS, and have a couple of hundred left over towards a better lens.

I could buy an RF 100-400 and save for a RF TC

I could buy a beat-up EF mount Sigma 100-500 and use it solo or with my Rexley 2xTC at high f-stops on the EOS R or M6

I could treat my wants for better bird shots as a passing phase and buy a 32 f/1.4 EF-M prime.

Please offer some advice on AF at higher f-stops and tick a box in the poll below.
Will I get much better AF and IS with a dedicated RF zoom?
WIll an older EF lens do the job and give me more flexibility?

Here are a few of the shots I've got in the last week with my current set-up to help you decide whether I could be a better birder with a better lens, or whether I should just scale back my ambition and concentrate more on other photograhy subjects.

The results you're getting are about the limit that the M5/M6 (I) AF and resolution can do, and are quite good.  I had the original M6 for about 2 months, it was the camera I used when I DIY'd that teleconverter you're using. I upgraded to the M6ii in late Nov 2020.

Value for money-wise, upgrading to the M6ii may be your best option. The AF ability of the M6ii is quite superior in terms of speed, and ability to focus in low light.  I found that the EF-S 55-250 IS STM plus 2X teleconverter could not autofocus with the M6 in anything but the best lighting, whereas the M6ii has no problem autofocusing with that combo even in quite poor lighting. Plus you get a little more reach with the higher res sensor --- however that 2X teleconverter can't really resolve the full res of the m6ii sensor, so it won't be that much of a gain for you. On my M6ii I use the 2x converter when shooting 4k video or if I absolutely need the most reach possible, otherwise I normally use the Kenko 1.5x SHQ on my EF-modded 55-250.

I do wish I had a longer lens at times, but the cost and weight of the EF 100-400 has kept me from buying it, it's too big to take along on my bicycle which is how I do most of my shooting. For astrophotography I use a meade ETX-125 telescope (1900mm, f15) for high magnifications which is quite a sharp instrument, with the Viltrox 0.71x speed booster I can even get the entire Moon through the scope on the frame as it becomes a 1350mm f11 scope with the booster.

Larry Rexley wrote:

User1303423862 wrote:

Hi all.
I have a dilemma to solve. I've been trying to get some nice shots of birds and I'm pushing the limits of what I can achieve with my M6 + EF-S 55-250 IS + Rexley 2X TC. The AF on the M6 isn't really quick enough and often hunts when pointed skyward.

I inherited an EOS R + 24-105 L from a company I was working for as part of the severance deal when they unexpectedly had to cancel the project I was involved with. The AF is great, but I get a mandatory crop to 12MP if I mount the EF-S 55-250 IS to it.

I'm between jobs at the moment so funds are limited, but I have time to be out trying to get nice shots. What to do? I've sold some cameras and lenses I'm not using and have a budget of around £600.

I could sell the M6 and upgrade to a M6ii or M50ii for better IS, and have a couple of hundred left over towards a better lens.

I could buy an RF 100-400 and save for a RF TC

I could buy a beat-up EF mount Sigma 100-500 and use it solo or with my Rexley 2xTC at high f-stops on the EOS R or M6

I could treat my wants for better bird shots as a passing phase and buy a 32 f/1.4 EF-M prime.

Please offer some advice on AF at higher f-stops and tick a box in the poll below.
Will I get much better AF and IS with a dedicated RF zoom?
WIll an older EF lens do the job and give me more flexibility?

Here are a few of the shots I've got in the last week with my current set-up to help you decide whether I could be a better birder with a better lens, or whether I should just scale back my ambition and concentrate more on other photograhy subjects.

The results you're getting are about the limit that the M5/M6 (I) AF and resolution can do, and are quite good. I had the original M6 for about 2 months, it was the camera I used when I DIY'd that teleconverter you're using. I upgraded to the M6ii in late Nov 2020.

Value for money-wise, upgrading to the M6ii may be your best option. The AF ability of the M6ii is quite superior in terms of speed, and ability to focus in low light. I found that the EF-S 55-250 IS STM plus 2X teleconverter could not autofocus with the M6 in anything but the best lighting, whereas the M6ii has no problem autofocusing with that combo even in quite poor lighting. Plus you get a little more reach with the higher res sensor --- however that 2X teleconverter can't really resolve the full res of the m6ii sensor, so it won't be that much of a gain for you. On my M6ii I use the 2x converter when shooting 4k video or if I absolutely need the most reach possible, otherwise I normally use the Kenko 1.5x SHQ on my EF-modded 55-250.

I do wish I had a longer lens at times, but the cost and weight of the EF 100-400 has kept me from buying it, it's too big to take along on my bicycle which is how I do most of my shooting. For astrophotography I use a meade ETX-125 telescope (1900mm, f15) for high magnifications which is quite a sharp instrument, with the Viltrox 0.71x speed booster I can even get the entire Moon through the scope on the frame as it becomes a 1350mm f11 scope with the booster.

Thanks for your prompt thoughts Larry! I'm guessing your astro work is the reason you're answering at this time of day in the U.S.

AF does seem to be my main limitation, although it sounds like my M6 is doing better than yours was. I've been having a lot of fun with that 2X TC you made. Resolution and reach is 'good enough' for me with the current setup. Hopefully, one of the forum members who has or has had an EOS R might give me an idea of the difference, if any, in AF capability between the M6ii + 55-250 + TC and the EOS R + 100-400 + TC.

I mostly go birding on my motorcycle, and the current setup allows me to zip up my leather jacket over it, just. A 'big gun' EF lens on the R would present an issue for sure.

The M6 uprade to M6ii is attractive for the benefits it would bring to my enjoyment of other photography genres too, so thanks again for your sage advice.

I am actually going the other direction based on evaluating all your needs and criteria.

I own M6 Mark II (also used to own R & RP), it's better than R for action, and much better for Video in 4K (no crop 1.74x in 4K for M6 II).

But if you don't do video, R is better all around camera to take with you. It still does 1080p, it's good enough for most people

My reasons:

You can sell your M6 gears + EF-S lens to fund for RF 100-400

Full frame works better in low light situation + R is slightly weather proof and has a bigger battery - and can take a battery grip should you decide to go into portrait or more serious photography (longer run time for birding or trip)

StevenSHH wrote:

I am actually going the other direction based on evaluating all your needs and criteria.

I own M6 Mark II (also used to own R & RP), it's better than R for action, and much better for Video in 4K (no crop 1.74x in 4K for M6 II).

But if you don't do video, R is better all around camera to take with you. It still does 1080p, it's good enough for most people

My reasons:

You can sell your M6 gears + EF-S lens to fund for RF 100-400

Full frame works better in low light situation + R is slightly weather proof and has a bigger battery - and can take a battery grip should you decide to go into portrait or more serious photography (longer run time for birding or trip)

Hi Stephen. I get what you're saying, and I would like to go further with my photography. The value of secondhand M series cameras and lenses is good at the moment, and the 2 RF zooms plus nifty fifty I have would make a reasonable 3 lens kit. I could aspire to the 35 f/1.8 IS or 16mm  without too much extra financial strain.

On the other hand, the M series is a lot of fun and I'd miss that lightweight 'good enough' setup with it's wider variety of affordable lenses. I have an old, heavy Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 that is pretty good in low light, in combination with my Viltrox speedbooster too.

Thanks for your thoughts.

User1303423862 wrote:

Hi Stephen. I get what you're saying, and I would like to go further with my photography. The value of secondhand M series cameras and lenses is good at the moment, and the 2 RF zooms plus nifty fifty I have would make a reasonable 3 lens kit. I could aspire to the 35 f/1.8 IS or 16mm without too much extra financial strain.

On the other hand, the M series is a lot of fun and I'd miss that lightweight 'good enough' setup with it's wider variety of affordable lenses. I have an old, heavy Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 that is pretty good in low light, in combination with my Viltrox speedbooster too.

Thanks for your thoughts.

M6 Mark II is not bad, but if you are really serious about birding - get the R7 , sell the R, maybe with M6 and other lense

R7's crop factor helps with reach and the AF is just next generation stuff.

Good Luck!

StevenSHH wrote:

User1303423862 wrote:

Hi Stephen. I get what you're saying, and I would like to go further with my photography. The value of secondhand M series cameras and lenses is good at the moment, and the 2 RF zooms plus nifty fifty I have would make a reasonable 3 lens kit. I could aspire to the 35 f/1.8 IS or 16mm without too much extra financial strain.

On the other hand, the M series is a lot of fun and I'd miss that lightweight 'good enough' setup with it's wider variety of affordable lenses. I have an old, heavy Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 that is pretty good in low light, in combination with my Viltrox speedbooster too.

Thanks for your thoughts.

M6 Mark II is not bad, but if you are really serious about birding - get the R7 , sell the R, maybe with M6 and other lense

R7's crop factor helps with reach and the AF is just next generation stuff.

Good Luck!

I know the R7 is state of the art for AF, but I'm reluctant to sell my M gear and get locked into a system using heavy full frame lenses or rehashed M lenses (at higher prices) with no native third party options to provide price competition and wider choice.

I like advanced tech, but hate being led by the nose.

Then maybe just sell the R for R10 (much better AF for both photo and video) because they are similar in prices. And that way you already get 1.6X crop range + for what your have 24-105 lens. And can upgrade later. or JUST USE EF TO RF ADAPTOR + R10 (rebel size, not FF size) and together with M6.

They share same battery pack and both are more portable options at this moment and gives you flexibility.

StevenSHH wrote:

Then maybe just sell the R for R10 (much better AF for both photo and video) because they are similar in prices. And that way you already get 1.6X crop range + for what your have 24-105 lens. And can upgrade later. or JUST USE EF TO RF ADAPTOR + R10 (rebel size, not FF size) and together with M6.

They share same battery pack and both are more portable options at this moment and gives you flexibility.

Keep the ideas coming

I was thinking of buying a Rebel SL1 off ebay to do time lapse and full readout 5K 14bit RAW video after I install magic lantern firmware.

This DSLR only weighs half an ounce more than my M6, and is hardly any larger than an R10.

User1303423862 wrote:

StevenSHH wrote:

User1303423862 wrote:

Hi Stephen. I get what you're saying, and I would like to go further with my photography. The value of secondhand M series cameras and lenses is good at the moment, and the 2 RF zooms plus nifty fifty I have would make a reasonable 3 lens kit. I could aspire to the 35 f/1.8 IS or 16mm without too much extra financial strain.

On the other hand, the M series is a lot of fun and I'd miss that lightweight 'good enough' setup with it's wider variety of affordable lenses. I have an old, heavy Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 that is pretty good in low light, in combination with my Viltrox speedbooster too.

Thanks for your thoughts.

M6 Mark II is not bad, but if you are really serious about birding - get the R7 , sell the R, maybe with M6 and other lense

R7's crop factor helps with reach and the AF is just next generation stuff.

Good Luck!

I know the R7 is state of the art for AF, but I'm reluctant to sell my M gear and get locked into a system using heavy full frame lenses or rehashed M lenses (at higher prices) with no native third party options to provide price competition and wider choice.

I like advanced tech, but hate being led by the nose.

I'm with you... I once calculated how much it would cost for me to move to 'R' and get 'similar' bodies and a comparable lens system. I shoot with 2 m6ii's and 2 M200's, and 14 lenses plus TCs and speed boosters. The 'upgrade' cost is well over $10,000!! I have spent less than $5000 on my entire system to date. The upgrade cost seems insane and it would be a far larger, heavier system - to get images that would be almost no different than what I get today with 'M' and DxO.

Sure the autofocus of the R7 is state of the art, but the M6ii and even M200 autofocus is also excellent for 95% of my uses. That extra 5% is not enough to warrant such a vast price difference.

Larry Rexley wrote:

User1303423862 wrote:

StevenSHH wrote:

M6 Mark II is not bad, but if you are really serious about birding - get the R7 , sell the R, maybe with M6 and other lense

R7's crop factor helps with reach and the AF is just next generation stuff.

Good Luck!

I know the R7 is state of the art for AF, but I'm reluctant to sell my M gear and get locked into a system using heavy full frame lenses or rehashed M lenses (at higher prices) with no native third party options to provide price competition and wider choice.

I like advanced tech, but hate being led by the nose.

I'm with you... I once calculated how much it would cost for me to move to 'R' and get 'similar' bodies and a comparable lens system. I shoot with 2 m6ii's and 2 M200's, and 14 lenses plus TCs and speed boosters. The 'upgrade' cost is well over $10,000!! I have spent less than $5000 on my entire system to date. The upgrade cost seems insane and it would be a far larger, heavier system - to get images that would be almost no different than what I get today with 'M' and DxO.

Sure the autofocus of the R7 is state of the art, but the M6ii and even M200 autofocus is also excellent for 95% of my uses. That extra 5% is not enough to warrant such a vast price difference.

Secondhand price on the M6ii is almost as high as new at the moment, and I don't think that'll change much anytime soon. I might buy my first ever brand new ILC.

I've found a possible lens option too. The Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS II USM is as quick to focus as the RX 100-400, and I could use it on both the M6ii and EOS R at full resolution. It's a gamble so far as birding goes, because Canon say it isn't TC compatible. As you and I know, Canon may just be saying that for commercial reasons, rather than optical/mechanical reasons. But even if I can't get a TC to work with it, I could have a lot of fun at the motorcycle race circuits and up in the hills getting dramatic landscape angles. And squirrels, of course.

User1303423862 wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

User1303423862 wrote:

StevenSHH wrote:

M6 Mark II is not bad, but if you are really serious about birding - get the R7 , sell the R, maybe with M6 and other lense

R7's crop factor helps with reach and the AF is just next generation stuff.

Good Luck!

I know the R7 is state of the art for AF, but I'm reluctant to sell my M gear and get locked into a system using heavy full frame lenses or rehashed M lenses (at higher prices) with no native third party options to provide price competition and wider choice.

I like advanced tech, but hate being led by the nose.

I'm with you... I once calculated how much it would cost for me to move to 'R' and get 'similar' bodies and a comparable lens system. I shoot with 2 m6ii's and 2 M200's, and 14 lenses plus TCs and speed boosters. The 'upgrade' cost is well over $10,000!! I have spent less than $5000 on my entire system to date. The upgrade cost seems insane and it would be a far larger, heavier system - to get images that would be almost no different than what I get today with 'M' and DxO.

Sure the autofocus of the R7 is state of the art, but the M6ii and even M200 autofocus is also excellent for 95% of my uses. That extra 5% is not enough to warrant such a vast price difference.

Secondhand price on the M6ii is almost as high as new at the moment, and I don't think that'll change much anytime soon. I might buy my first ever brand new ILC.

I've found a possible lens option too. The Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS II USM is as quick to focus as the RX 100-400, and I could use it on both the M6ii and EOS R at full resolution. It's a gamble so far as birding goes, because Canon say it isn't TC compatible. As you and I know, Canon may just be saying that for commercial reasons, rather than optical/mechanical reasons. But even if I can't get a TC to work with it, I could have a lot of fun at the motorcycle race circuits and up in the hills getting dramatic landscape angles. And squirrels, of course.

The EF 70-300 L definitely doesn't accept a Canon TC, there is insufficient room behind the rear element.  It will apparently accept a Kenko TC, but with some AF issues.

Your 55-250 STM will work brilliantly on an R7 or R10 body, using the EF-RF adapter.  My strong suggestion is to go with an R7/10, possibly by selling something.  You aren't limited to "expensive FF RF lenses" as you can use any EF or EF-S lens.  One very good lens to adapt is the 10-18STM which gives the UWA currently missing from the APS-C R range.  You will be amazed at the AF on the new cameras, especially for birds whether perched or in flight.

drsnoopy wrote:

User1303423862 wrote:

Secondhand price on the M6ii is almost as high as new at the moment, and I don't think that'll change much anytime soon. I might buy my first ever brand new ILC.

I've found a possible lens option too. The Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS II USM is as quick to focus as the RX 100-400, and I could use it on both the M6ii and EOS R at full resolution. It's a gamble so far as birding goes, because Canon say it isn't TC compatible. As you and I know, Canon may just be saying that for commercial reasons, rather than optical/mechanical reasons. But even if I can't get a TC to work with it, I could have a lot of fun at the motorcycle race circuits and up in the hills getting dramatic landscape angles. And squirrels, of course.

The EF 70-300 L definitely doesn't accept a Canon TC, there is insufficient room behind the rear element. It will apparently accept a Kenko TC, but with some AF issues.

Your 55-250 STM will work brilliantly on an R7 or R10 body, using the EF-RF adapter. My strong suggestion is to go with an R7/10, possibly by selling something. You aren't limited to "expensive FF RF lenses" as you can use any EF or EF-S lens. One very good lens to adapt is the 10-18STM which gives the UWA currently missing from the APS-C R range. You will be amazed at the AF on the new cameras, especially for birds whether perched or in flight.

I didn't know there was an L series 70-300. I can't find it searchng on the net.
I will be selling my M6 to upgrade, but the situation with the UWA zoom is one of the reasons I'll be staying with EF-M for the time being.

Canon EOS M6 II + EF-M 11-22 UWA                         Canon EOS R10 + EF-S 10-18 UWA

User1303423862 wrote:

drsnoopy wrote:

User1303423862 wrote:

Secondhand price on the M6ii is almost as high as new at the moment, and I don't think that'll change much anytime soon. I might buy my first ever brand new ILC.

I've found a possible lens option too. The Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS II USM is as quick to focus as the RX 100-400, and I could use it on both the M6ii and EOS R at full resolution. It's a gamble so far as birding goes, because Canon say it isn't TC compatible. As you and I know, Canon may just be saying that for commercial reasons, rather than optical/mechanical reasons. But even if I can't get a TC to work with it, I could have a lot of fun at the motorcycle race circuits and up in the hills getting dramatic landscape angles. And squirrels, of course.

The EF 70-300 L definitely doesn't accept a Canon TC, there is insufficient room behind the rear element. It will apparently accept a Kenko TC, but with some AF issues.

Your 55-250 STM will work brilliantly on an R7 or R10 body, using the EF-RF adapter. My strong suggestion is to go with an R7/10, possibly by selling something. You aren't limited to "expensive FF RF lenses" as you can use any EF or EF-S lens. One very good lens to adapt is the 10-18STM which gives the UWA currently missing from the APS-C R range. You will be amazed at the AF on the new cameras, especially for birds whether perched or in flight.

I didn't know there was an L series 70-300. I can't find it searchng on the net.
I will be selling my M6 to upgrade, but the situation with the UWA zoom is one of the reasons I'll be staying with EF-M for the time being.

Canon EOS M6 II + EF-M 11-22 UWA Canon EOS R10 + EF-S 10-18 UWA

I've owned the EF-S 10-18mm IS STM. it has pretty good image quality but soft corners. The EF-M 11-22 IS STM is a noticeably sharper lens all around, even at 24 MP and especially with the 32 MP M6ii.  The ranges of the lenses are different -- obviously the 10-18 goes wider (which I miss a little) but the 11-22 also makes a better walkaround lens as the 22mm end is getting into the 'normal' range and I like that a lot.

nnowak wrote:

To start with, I would ditch the 2X converter. It appears to be seriously degrading your image quality and the reduction in light won't be doing you AF any favors either. 2X converters, in general, tend to seriously degrade image quality and you are often better off just cropping further from a 1.4X converter.

Firstly, thanks for taking the time to make a detailed response. I appreciate your detailed technical knowledge and value your appraisal.

In terms of equivalence, your combo has a full frame equivalence of 176-800mm f/8-11. That is quite long and quite dark, especially when paired with an older camera like the original M6. Larry Rexley's recommended 1.5X teleconverter would put you at 132-600mm f/5.6-8, which is still quite a bit of reach.

Larry kindly offered me his spare 2X TC after I ran into problems with my Kenko 1.5X project. I agree the degree of light loss is an issue, although I think the gull and squirrel shots shows the optics themselves are pretty good. Certainly good enough for my needs. I do peep at my pixels, but also take a more relaxed perspective, viewing the image at around 50% on the screen, to get an idea of how it would look as an A3 print from a few feet away. The very few prints I order go on the walls in my home or to my friends/family who request them.

I could be mistaken, but your post reads a bit like you are looking for a quick fix because you currently have some free time and a bit of free cash. I would suggest taking a long term view of your gear and determine where you want to be a year from now instead of what might work this minute. Maybe that means the R7 + RF 100-500mm, or maybe the M6 II + Sigma 150-600mm, or maybe you continue with what you have.

Part of the fun I get out of photography is in 'bucking the system' to get results which punch above the weight of the kit used and money invested. I have other hobbies calling on my cash, and I get my most interesting shots while I'm pursuing them; in the hills, on motorbike rides, in crowds at events etc. It's been great having a bit of birding time on bright autumn days while I'm between contracts, I like the peace and quiet. Once I'm working again and have more money, I might develop my RF system a bit further. I wont pay £500 for a TC though, that's just extortionate. Big Sigmas I'm a bit doubtful of too. The standard version is a bit fragile and slow, and the sport version is damned heavy. Currently, an upgrade from M6 to M6ii and maybe the fast focusing EF 70-300 nano USM lens is in my sights. I can use it on both systems.

In the interim, I would recommend working on yourself. Learn everything you can about the birds you are trying to capture and then use that information to put yourself in a better position to get closer to the birds. Start with the easier birds that will let you get really close. Even the lowly sparrow can make for a compelling image when photographed from only a meter away. Drop the teleconverters and see what you can capture with just the 55-250mm as this would be equivalent to what the 100-400mm would get you on your R.

I'm not such a dedicated birder that I'm going to lie in wait for a grey heron dressed in camo, or wade into the millpond to get closer before he flaps away. 5000 ISO certainly degraded my image at that shady pool, but it still looks quite nice at A3 print size. Sooner or later. I'll get closer shots of the red kites, there is a big population near me and it's just a matter of time.

Pigeons can be brought really close with some pastry scraps. Here's a recent shot from my indestructible Ricoh PX.

No, you can't have any more of my cheese and onion pasty. Get lost!

Ignore the EXIF, something got twisted up in post there!

GAS = Gear Acquisition Syndrome? I was a little confused by the post title. (Farting interrupting your stealthiness? Need to be downwind?)

skinner1215 wrote:

GAS = Gear Acquisition Syndrome? I was a little confused by the post title. (Farting interrupting your stealthiness? Need to be downwind?)

Right first time. It kicks in as the dark nights and dim days draw into winter, demanding more expensive new gear with better high ISO capability, faster AF in low light and wider apertures...

User1303423862 wrote:

skinner1215 wrote:

GAS = Gear Acquisition Syndrome? I was a little confused by the post title. (Farting interrupting your stealthiness? Need to be downwind?)

Right first time. It kicks in as the dark nights and dim days draw into winter, demanding more expensive new gear with better high ISO capability, faster AF in low light and wider apertures...

Oh yes, I know it well, just not by that name. "Well, that extra boost from f1.8 to f1.4 could come in really handy someday!" And who doesn't want a $20K lens that weighs as much as a small child?

skinner1215 wrote:

User1303423862 wrote:

skinner1215 wrote:

GAS = Gear Acquisition Syndrome? I was a little confused by the post title. (Farting interrupting your stealthiness? Need to be downwind?)

Right first time. It kicks in as the dark nights and dim days draw into winter, demanding more expensive new gear with better high ISO capability, faster AF in low light and wider apertures...

Oh yes, I know it well, just not by that name. "Well, that extra boost from f1.8 to f1.4 could come in really handy someday!" And who doesn't want a $20K lens that weighs as much as a small child?

Given the choice between another small child and the $20K lens, the lens sounds like a bargain to me!