[Durbs]

So, new 7D coming my way for Christmas, replacing a very well-used 1000D and I have a suspicion the AF on my Sigma 70-300 APO DG will be too slow to get the best out of it (My other lenses are pretty good).

It's currently  shipping with the 70-300 f/4-5.6 L with £80 cashback (on the lens) which would be a good direct replacement, or, for about £13 less, I could get a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 and a 2x teleconverter (or £43 less for the 1.4).

Both have good IS, the Sigma apparently slightly better - the Sigma combo would give me 400 f/4 but with slight loss in IQ from the TC vs. the slower Canon 300mm at f/5.6

The maximum aperture at 300mm on the Canon puts me off a bit as it's no better than my current lens (in terms of f-stop, obviously the glass itself will kick ass), but given I'm upgrading from a non-IS lens and the ISO 1600 on my 1000D is un-usable will this still be ok? I know from many hours of wildlife snapping that I usually struggle with 5.6 to get a decent hand-held shot with my current set-up.

Thoughts?

[Johnny Brown]

So you want something to shoot wildlife? Did you delete a line somewhere as it s bit confusing?

Personally I'd go for the 70-200 f/2.8 plus the 1.4x converter, which will get you to 320mm f/4. AF on that should be faster than the 70-300, and although the range will be the same you'll get more flexibility. Unless size and weight matter in which case get the 70-300. NB The 2x on the 70-200 will get you to 400 f/5.6 not f/4 - and the AF will likely struggle.

Not used a either that lens or that camera but I'd expect you'll get two big upgrades - decent quality at ISO 1600 and 2-stops improvement on handholding. They will be additive so it should be a big gain in terms of handholding.

I've always favoured primes for wildlife, I'd suggest its worth considering a 400mm f/5.6 too. You lose a lot of flexibility but gain on sharpness and size. It depends what else you're up to.

Edit: and whatever you buy, get hold of a decent tripod.

[cofe]

7D ISO is solid at 1600, unless you're a 100% zoom monitor peeping pervert. Years back I had a Sigma 70-200 2.8 non-IS lens. Really good, just too big for what I used it for. I can't comment on the lenses otherwise, but the camera is boss.

[Paul B]

I've always favoured primes for wildlife, I'd suggest its worth considering a 400mm f/5.6 too. You lose a lot of flexibility but gain on sharpness and size.

I loved my 400mm f/5.6 L whilst in France, I wasn't so fond in England with the combination of f/5.6, no IS and generally worse weather (however I'm no expert). I went for the prime after comparing a LOT of options in Harrisons, Sheffield. Contrast and sharpness was just much better (this IS from a 200% pixel peeping tom). After that the Sigma 100-300 f/4 was my choice (for IQ) with the option of a 1.4 TC on top of that. I didn't really get on too well with the pump-action canon zooms.

In fact, the bloke I sold the 400mm to got in touch recently to try and sell it back to me as he hadn't yet used it. If you're interested I could make enquiries etc.

[Johnny Brown]

Sigma 100-300 f/4 was my choice (for IQ) with the option of a 1.4 TC on top of that

Sounds like a good option too. Generally I think 2x converters should be a last resort option.

Be useful to know if you've any other lenses Durbs.

[dave]

Just get a D800 and crop.

[Johnny Brown]

Okay, what lens do you suggest?

[cofe]

one o' them babby lenses

[Durbs]

Sorry, it would be for mostly wildlife, but I'm a bit of a "photograph anything" person...
Current lens line-up is:
Canon 50 f/1.8 II, Canon 24-105 USM, Sigma 10-20, Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro.

I'm happy with the 50mm - the AF is slow, but fine for what I use it for, so the 70-300 is the weakest in the line-up and I just don't think it'll do the 7D justice really.

70-200 with the 1.4 TC would make it 280mm not 320mm n'est pas? (Without crop factor).
I do find I always want a bit longer with the 300mm, but again on a better body, can probably just crop with confidence - which again comes back to longer range but lower IQ at 400mm with a 2x TC, or better IQ but cropped with 300mm L.

Sigma 100-300 f/4 was my choice (for IQ) with the option of a 1.4 TC on top of that

Can't find that lens...?

[Durbs]

N.B. Already have a tripod and monopod

Another bonus of Sigma vs. Canon is Sigma comes with a tripod collar, Canon doesn't.

[Johnny Brown]

http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lenses/telezoom/100-300mm.htm

I'd be looking at that (will be compatible with a 1.4x too) or the 400 f/5.6. Budget?

70-200 with the 1.4 TC would make it 280mm not 320mm n'est pas?

Of course. Head is up arse at the mo.

[gingerninja]

not used the sigma but i have got the canon 70-200 f4 and its really sharp, better than the old f2.8 is. this is the lightest and cheapest of the canon L lenses at this length. i have used this with a 1.4x converter to shoot motorbike track days and found it was pretty good. i was using it on my 7d and had no problems focusing. i had a mono pod and fixed it to my belt for panning stability. got some cracking shot so maybe worth thinking about that as a poss.

ps check the focusing when you get your 7d, there have been problems with it back focusing with some.

[Durbs]

Budget - As near to (or less than) a grand as possible.
Without DigitalRev'ing:

Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x TC - £994.83
Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 2x TC - £1024.83
Canon 70-300 L = £1077

[Paul B]

Buy used.  All of mine apart from my nifty fifty are used and I haven't had a single issue. The body itself is used too come to think of it.

Canon 400mm f/5.6 ~ £700-800 (I bought one of these, owned it for 6 months and sold it for the grand sum of £20)
Sigma 100-300 + 1.4 TC ~ £650

What about the 'Bigmas', they seemed to be a well thought-of birding lens (pretty heavy though)?

Register on Talkphotography and get involved, after 30 days and 30 posts (inc. replies) you're eligible to use the Sale section and there are some real bargains in there.

Is back focussing really an issue? You get Micro Adjustment on the 7d (I think), a good few of my lenses have needed this on my 5dII.

(What's wrong with Digitalrev, they have a UK warehouse now?)

[gme]

Re digital Rev. I have used them for a majority of my gear and have had no issues at all, in fact the speed of delivery from Hong Kong is better than stuff i have bought in the UK. I have even had a repair done under warranty without question.

Re lenses, i am relatively new to digital stuff having shot film for years then had a break without an slr for 10 years. Now got a 7D which i love and also a canon 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II. Without doubt the best lens i have ever used and worth every penny. Shoot a fair bit of surf stuff (when there's any swell) and it needs to focus very quickly and shot rapidly. Hits the nail on the head on both accounts.

Use a 1.4 converter and find no reduction in performance at all.

Only down size is the weight, mostly hand held stuff so it becomes pretty tiring after a few hours.

[Johnny Brown]

Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x TC - £994.83
Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 + 2x TC - £1024.83
Canon 70-300 L = £1077

Strikes me you are getting a shit load more value for money with the first two options. Especially considering you already have an equivalently specced 70-300 over which gains will be small. Why is that Canon 70-300 so expensive? Is it that DO one with the diffraction grid instead of a lens, in which case isn't the bokeh awful?

Canon 400mm f/5.6 ~ £700-800 (I bought one of these, owned it for 6 months and sold it for the grand sum of £20)

Jeez Paul, your bad luck never ends!

Only down size is the weight, mostly hand held stuff so it becomes pretty tiring after a few hours.

GME, you should look into a basic monopod. I've not done much surf photography but one was ideal when I did.

PS I've had no bother with digitalrev either.

[Paul B]

Canon 400mm f/5.6 ~ £700-800 (I bought one of these, owned it for 6 months and sold it for the grand sum of £20)

Jeez Paul, your bad luck never ends!

Badly punctuated, I meant I only lost £20 

[Durbs]

...Especially considering you already have an equivalently specced 70-300 over which gains will be small.

Ah, but unless I've inadvertantly added extra letters, my current Sigma 70-300 is the £150 one - so 1 or 2 APO elements as opposed to all the glass, so the Canon is the same spec f-stop wise, but should kick ass optically and IS-ally.

Was avoiding Digital Rev partly for warranty (though I gather this is actually fine), but also out of a strange sense of "shopping local", though I'm not sure WEX really counts as local.
Tax scandals and supporting independents vs. saving about £200 on RRP...

Maybe I'll take Paul B's option - new body, 2nd-hand lens.

As I don't shoot just wildlife, I like the flexibilty of a zoom as opposed to prime...