Canon 5D3 or Canon 300mm f2.8L?

photodad1photodad1 Registered Users Posts: 566 Major grins
edited April 13, 2013 in Cameras
I am currently using a Canon 7D with a Canon 70-200mm f2.8L IS for shooting high school sports and minor league baseball. Using the 7D is a challenge during low light situations for capturing action. I am thinking of either purchasing the Canon 5D3 using my TC 1.4 with the 70-200mm f2.8 or keeping my 7D and purchase the Canon 300mm f2.8L IS. Any suggestions?

Comments

  • babowcbabowc Registered Users Posts: 510 Major grins
    edited April 10, 2013
    Aren't the 300mm 2.8 and 5d3 a large difference in price?
    Last I checked, 300mm 2.8 was somewhere north of $7000!

    I'd love to get my hands on a Nikon 300mm 2.8 VRII..

    Do you need more low-light capabilities, or do you need more reach?
    If it's the latter, 300mm 2.8.
    If former, I still think the 300mm will be better than the 5d3 with the TC.
    -Mike Jin
    D800
    16/2.8, f1.4G primes, f2.8 trio, 105/200 macro, SB900.
    It never gets easier, you just get better.
  • photodad1photodad1 Registered Users Posts: 566 Major grins
    edited April 10, 2013
    I'm looking at purchasing a used Canon 300mm f2.8L IS version I. The price range is $3800-$4200 on average. I'm looking for more low-light capabilities and more reach. The used lens is a little more than a new 5D3. Adding the TC with 7D makes the 70-200mm f2.8L to a f4.0 so I find myself shooting at ISO 4000 and the photos have a bunch of noise and forget about cropping.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited April 11, 2013
    Based on my experience owning both, I would estimate the 5D3's high ISO performance is at least 2 stops better than the 7D. So, by switching to a 5D3 and using a 1.4xTC, you're doing at least 1 stop better than the 7D with the bare 70-200. I enjoy my 5D3 a lot more than the 7D in general, so I would say go for it, but you also say you want more reach. If you can't buy the 5D3 and 300/2.8 at the same time you're going to be losing a little reach.

    Another thought is buying the 5D3 and a 300/4 at the same time.
    babowc wrote:
    Do you need more low-light capabilities, or do you need more reach?
    If it's the latter, 300mm 2.8.
    If former, I still think the 300mm will be better than the 5d3 with the TC

    7D + 300/2.8 (combo A) vs. 5D3 + 70-200/2.8 + 1.4xTC (combo B) is kind of an apples vs. oranges comparison. Combo A at a given ISO is going to give him the same shutter speed as combo B at twice the ISO. But since the 5D3 is at least 2 stops better, it still wins. The only question is reach, I think.

    Check out these ISO 8000 5D3 sports shots (not mine):
    http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50276257
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • bloomphotogbloomphotog Registered Users Posts: 582 Major grins
    edited April 11, 2013
    photodad1 wrote: »
    ...I'm looking for more low-light capabilities and more reach...

    Being that you already have a 2.8 lens, it sounds like you need both the 5D3 and the 300 2.8. One or the other by themselves won't solve your problem.

    Something else to consider: 200 2.0 and a TC. Keep the 7D, you won't lose any reach, and you'll be getting close to a 500mm 2.8 with TC!
    joshmartinezphotography.com
  • puzzledpaulpuzzledpaul Registered Users Posts: 1,621 Major grins
    edited April 11, 2013
    bloomphotog wrote: »
    ... 500mm 2.8 ...

    Lugging the f4 version around is a right pita at times ... a 2.8 would be a stop too far, methinks :)

    pp
    Website

    Flickr
  • bloomphotogbloomphotog Registered Users Posts: 582 Major grins
    edited April 11, 2013
    puzzledpaul wrote: »
    Lugging the f4 version around is a right pita at times ... a 2.8 would be a stop too far, methinks :)

    pp

    That's why the 200 f/2 with TC & 7D would be a killer setup. All the reach, f/2.8 and half the size and weight.
    joshmartinezphotography.com
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited April 11, 2013
    bloomphotog wrote: »
    That's why the 200 f/2 with TC & 7D would be a killer setup. All the reach, f/2.8 and half the size and weight.

    What? The 200/2.0's front element is the same size as a 300/2.8, which is obvious when you think of what an f-number is. ;-) They both weigh 5.6 pounds.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • bloomphotogbloomphotog Registered Users Posts: 582 Major grins
    edited April 11, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    What? The 200/2.0's front element is the same size as a 300/2.8, which is obvious when you think of what an f-stop is. ;-) They both weigh 5.6 pounds.

    Less weight vs the 500mm...
    joshmartinezphotography.com
  • photodad1photodad1 Registered Users Posts: 566 Major grins
    edited April 12, 2013
    I think I'm going to buy the 5D3, new, once it drops in price again.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited April 13, 2013
    bloomphotog wrote: »
    Less weight vs the 500mm...

    Ah, right, missed that browsing on my phone.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • photodad1photodad1 Registered Users Posts: 566 Major grins
    edited April 13, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Based on my experience owning both, I would estimate the 5D3's high ISO performance is at least 2 stops better than the 7D. So, by switching to a 5D3 and using a 1.4xTC, you're doing at least 1 stop better than the 7D with the bare 70-200. I enjoy my 5D3 a lot more than the 7D in general, so I would say go for it, but you also say you want more reach. If you can't buy the 5D3 and 300/2.8 at the same time you're going to be losing a little reach.

    Another thought is buying the 5D3 and a 300/4 at the same time.



    7D + 300/2.8 (combo A) vs. 5D3 + 70-200/2.8 + 1.4xTC (combo B) is kind of an apples vs. oranges comparison. Combo A at a given ISO is going to give him the same shutter speed as combo B at twice the ISO. But since the 5D3 is at least 2 stops better, it still wins. The only question is reach, I think.

    Check out these ISO 8000 5D3 sports shots (not mine):
    http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50276257

    Very nice at ISO 8000. The 7D doesn't come close to that even at ISO 3200.
Sign In or Register to comment.