What would you do - lens or body?

EMA747

EMA747

Messages
2,070
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
I just sold my 70-200 f2.8 IS and got a 100-400 as I shoot mainly aviation. I have enough left over to buy either a Canon 70-200 f4 or a 40D second hand.
I don't know which would be of most use.

The 70-200 f4 would come in really useful as a lightweight travel zoom to go with my current 17-40 L. The 100-400 is for aviation/wildlife really so the 70-200 would be easy to just chuck in my bag rather than carry a weighty lens.

I currently have a 400D and am really starting to find the limits. Mainly RAW capture speed for aviation and the lack of spot metering. I want to upgrade to the 7D eventually but I doubt that will be any time soon.

So what should I go for?
 
Most folk will tell you to buy a decent lens before a body upgrade...i do want i feel i want to do.

I hanker after a 70-200 for my 5D classic, but atm i'm on a nifty fifity and a Tamron 17-35. These lenses are far from L grade lenses, but i'm happy with them for what i shoot and that's the main thing to me.

If you think you'be happier with a body than a 70-200, then go for it. Personnally, i'd have said as you have the 100-400, getting a 70-200 would have been a bit of a waste.
 
Tough call.

On the one hand ... I've recently gone from a 350D to a 40D, and it does seem like a big step. Not in terms of image quality, probably, but in terms of being able to get the image in the first place. Since you're hitting the limits of the 400D, this would be a good upgrade for you.

On the other hand, the 70-200 f/4 would fit nicely into your kit bag. Yes, it does have a considerable overlap with the 100-400, but the latter is a big lump to carry around. I think you're absolutely right when you say it would be a useful lightweight travel zoom.

I'm not going to try to resolve this for you. It's too nuanced. Your money, your shout. Sorry.
 
EMA747 said:
Mainly RAW capture speed for aviation and the lack of spot metering. So what should I go for?
Click to expand...

Silly question time, what are you using spot metering for?

OK I accept there will be an improvement in capture / download to card speeds for the 40D v 400D, also shutter lag is improved which will be of great benefit for your action photography.

As for lens or camera, the 70-200mm f4 is a nice lens, as Stewart said

I'm not going to try to resolve this for you. It's too nuanced. Your money, your shout. Sorry.
Click to expand...
 
EMA747 said:
Mainly RAW capture speed for aviation and the lack of spot metering.
Click to expand...

pete.rush said:
Silly question time, what are you using spot metering for?
Click to expand...

I thought about that, but then I realised he said "RAW capture speed for aviation and the lack of spot metering" - not "RAW capture speed and the lack of spot metering for aviation". So I assumed he wanted the RAW capture speed for aviation and spot metering for other stuff. :thumbs:
 
personally, i would go for the 40d.

you already have some great glass to put in front of it. and as someone who has just upgraded from a 400d. the upgrade on what you can see through the viewfinder is incredible
 
Being a Nikon man I don't know how they compare, but I recently went from a D60 to a D90 and it's opened up a whole new world for me, the difference is amazing. Now I won't upgrade again until I can afford to go full frame, but that initial upgrade was well worth doing.
 
Could you not buy the 40D and then sell the 400D and put the money towards the Canon 70-200 f4 , means in a few months you will have the best of both worlds without the worry your body 'limiting' you?
 
Looking at a few 40Ds on fleabay as there don't seem to any on here at the moment.
 
Go for the 40D body, i went from 300D to 40D and there is a BIG difference, does the 400D have AI SERVO? very useful for tracking planes.!
70-200 will have the edge over 100-400 in low light conditions but not the reach which you need for aviation/wildlife which are your main subjects.
 
Well, as you know I bought your 70-200 :D

I also have a 50D, 100-400 as my main sporting lens, plus the 400D as a second body and the 70-200 F4. These are mostly used by my youngest as his camera, so I'm replacing the 70-200 for touchline work. The 100 end is just a little too long.

The 70-200 F4 is a great lens, light, good performance and being a lot smaller than the 2.8 really suits the 400D. Usually I'd suggest getting the lens over a new body every time.

But - when my 40D broke and I waited 8 weeks for a replacement (the 50D) I was reduced to using the 400D and I found I was having problems. Features I'd got used to having access to were 'hidden' away on a multitude of button pushes or in the menu. I missed the big wheel and my number of keeper shots dropped. Also the 100-400 just felt too big on the 400D.

I suppose it depends on your other lenses as I have the 24-105 as a walkabout so have been able to cover the range with just the 100-400 so far, but I'd suggest getting the body upgrade. I bought our 400D second hand for just over £200 so it may be worth considering keeping it as a second body? Very small and light to put in a bag (shame the batteries are different sizes).

Oh and if you're worried about weight, then just get a good camera backpack. I have a lowepro computreker aw and the additional waist belt makes it a dream to carry. Usually in my bag I have the 50D with 24-105, 100-400, 50mm 1.4, 10-22, 2x convertor, 580 flash plus flash cards, 4 batteries., extra AA batteries etc. I took the lot to Sri Lanka this year and went on many long walk without a problem. Not too sure how I'm going to get the new lens in as well :D - could be time for a bag upgrade
 
As I said in the 70-200 sale add I found it too short for aviation as I really like the close ups rather than standard side on shots. I do however feel the 70-200 would be an excellent range for when I'm out and need something a bit longer. I have a 17-40 L which is wide but on a 1.6 crop it seems to serve me very well as a walkabout lens but with a slightly wider lower end (it's one lens I would never sell!).

Saying all that I like the idea of getting a 40D as my 400D is getting a bit limiting and to be honest quite old. I would probably keep it as a 2nd body as I bet it's worth naff all now anyway. ;)

Oh I really don't know what to do.....ah I know rob a bank then I can buy a 5D and get another 70-200 f4 and a 70-200 f2.8 IS like I just sold. We all have to have dreams right? :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top