# EF 200-400 OR 5D MK IV?



## Monte (Dec 13, 2016)

Hi All,
I'm looking for opinions on my set-up and potential changes in my gear. Keeping in mind that these thoughts are centered around the plan to go to Masi-Mara in the spring of 2018 with the family (3 little pack mules ) and I need to get my gear there as carry on luggage.
What I have currently is the following:
7D MKii's (2), 6D, EF 100-400 MKii, EF400 f2.8 IS MKi, 1.4 ext MKiii, EF 24-105 f4/L, Plus more that's not applicable.

I want the EF 200-400, but can't justify the cost and it's still heavy for carry-on/travel accumulation. What I'm thinking is that the performance of the new EF 100-400 MKii with the 1.4iii extender is pretty good, but I want better low light capability for wildlife in motion etc. at the low light ends of the day.
So I'm thinking of getting a 5D MKiv. From the reviews on it and it's ability to pull details out of the shadows etc.and it's auto focus capability that this would be a lighter, cheaper alternative for traveling in place of the EF 200-400 option. My 12 pound 400 f/2.8 is not really a travel option as well as lack of zoom flexability. I would use the 5D MKiv at the ends of the day.
I just do this for fun, no business or profits, so hard to justify what I've already got.
What do you guys think?


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 13, 2016)

There are three users here who can give you excellent first hand experience of your specific situation. Eldar, eml58 and Grant Atkinson.

I'd strongly recommend emailing each directly they are all very accommodating and helpful but if the thread devolves into the typical dream boy's wish list nonsense they will pass it by.


----------



## Monte (Dec 13, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> There are three users here who can give you excellent first hand experience of your specific situation. Eldar, eml58 and Grant Atkinson.
> 
> I'd strongly recommend emailing each directly they are all very accommodating and helpful but if the thread devolves into the typical dream boy's wish list nonsense they will pass it by.



Thanks, I have communicated with Grant not that long ago hence why I now have the EF 100-400 MKii as per his praise of this lens and he was very helpful. I did just send this question to him as per your triggering me to do so.
Thanks,


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 13, 2016)

Is renting the 200-400 an option?

I would definitely get the 5DIV for its better AF (compared to the 6D), better noise characteristics and better low ISO DR and higher MP (compared to both). Having a larger spread of AF points at f/8 would also be useful for more composition flexibility. At low light levels (high ISOs), the IQ advantages of the 5DIV are reduced relative to other Canon FF cameras, which is why I still suggest looking into renting the 200-400 to get you back that stop of light.


----------



## zim (Dec 13, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> There are three users here who can give you excellent first hand experience of your specific situation. Eldar, eml58 and Grant Atkinson.
> 
> I'd strongly recommend emailing each directly they are all very accommodating and helpful but if the thread devolves into the typical dream boy's wish list nonsense they will pass it by.



If you don't mind me saying, that's damn good advice.


----------



## FEBS (Dec 13, 2016)

I will pass you my experience there about. I don't own the 5Div but do have 2x 1DxII, 5Diii and also 7D2. I also have 100-400II and 200-400. During the last three years I visited Zimbabwe, Botswana, Uganda and Costa Rica and did several safaris in all those areas.

First time on safari I did use the 200-400 together with a 1Dx at that time. Very nice pictures, however, afterwards I bought the 600/f4 which is still a bit better. The 200-400 is for sure a very flexible lens, but the difference with the 100-400II is very small. The 200-400 isn't used the last year. I even think about selling it and buying a 400DOii for bif photography. Nowadays I mostly use the 100-400II and the 600+1.4III each on a 1DxII. As you all ready own the 100-400II, I would not look further for the 200-400 as you don't have more reach on your 7D2 in practice. Also the stop of difference between 100-400 and 200-400 on the long end means only about 10minutes more time during sunset, and most wildlife is all ready settling for the comming night at that moment. Masa Mari, has comparable light conditions with Uganda, and there the 100-400II will do a great job.

The 5Div is something else. The 7D2 is a good camera, however, it can't beat the 5Diii, 1Dx or 1Dxii, and probably also not the 5Div but as I don't own that is this last one based on assumption. FF will give you lot better photo's compared to APS, and the difference will become clear just in those hours that the wildlife is most active. 

If I need to choose for 200-400 and 7D2 or 100-400 and 5D3, then last will be the combination I use. I will have better photos compared to the first combination. As 5Div is even better, I would go for the 100-400 with 1.4iii and the 5Div. You will see that you will use that combo for most of the day. I only would remove the extender when it really gets to dark. Big advantage is also the reduced size and weight of that combo. And as you didn't mention specifically birds, than this is the combo to go.

just my 2c 

Francois


----------



## lion rock (Dec 13, 2016)

I lust after the 200-400. Period.
I'll lust after it, while getting either the 300/2.8LII or the 400DOII.
The 200-400 is just a great lens, but it's TOO heavy, both to travel on an airplane or handhold. I'm outclassed by these factors.
I used (rented) both the 300 and the 400DO and used them for a full day, handheld, and found it to be totally usable.
Lastly, the cost of the 200-400 is a bit difficult to swallow. I have the funds (she who must be obeyed said I can go for it) for it, but I can get the 400DOII and save the difference for something else.
So ...
Your decision.
-r


----------



## StudentOfLight (Dec 13, 2016)

Perhaps there will even be a 7D Mark-III before 2018. :-X


----------



## arbitrage (Dec 14, 2016)

You mentioned that one reason you are thinking about the 5D4 is the ability to push shadows. Remember this advantage is only at ISO 100-200 (very slightly better up to 400). After that it isn't any better than the other current cameras like 5D3, 1DX. Somehow I don't think you will be using the 5D4 in the darker hours and shooting at ISO 100-200. So keep that in mind if that really was a big factor in your 5D4 lust.

That out of the way. 200-400 may not be all that much sharper or contrasty over the 100-400II. BUT. it still has an extra stop and the amazing flexibility of the built in TC (no better place for that than dusty Africa).

I own the 100-400II and 200-400. I almost sold my 200-400 earlier this fall but then decided to make an effort to use it again and the super convenience of having 200-560 f/4-5.6 all there instantly without silly converters convinced me to keep it. Just used it the other day with an extra 1.4 attached on the 1DX2 (first time I'd tried it with the new f/8 focusing)...man did that make a difference at 784 f/8 compared to how it was on the 1DX (and 7D2). Once again convinced me the 200-400 is too good of a lens to let go. Depending on the light and reach you can set it up as a 280-784 f/5.6-8 and that can be very useful also.

Personally I'd go for the 200-400 over a 5D4. The 200-400 is actually pretty easy to travel with. Heck it fits in my laptop GuraGear Chobe bag if I so choose. I've taken it to Borneo, Antarctica and Ecuador recently and it was just an amazing lens to have travelling because of the versatility. Yes in some of those places I would have liked to have my 600II along but that is a big lens to travel with and very specific. The 200-400 is just the best overall travel lens for wildlife and birds (in a lot of scenarios but not all).


----------



## tron (Dec 14, 2016)

The 200-400 is big and heavy. It is heavier than the 500 and as heavy as the 600!!!!

I would strongly suggest against it.

For me the best solution would be the 400 DO II. It pairs wonderfully with both a FF camera and a 7D2 (speaking from personal experience). In addition I have used it successfully with my 1.4XIII (and a 7D2).


----------



## Mikehit (Dec 14, 2016)

My comments here relate to the 1Dx2 but I believe will pretty much apply to the 5DIV as well, from what I have read so far. 

I have the 7D2 and the 100-400mkii and that lens is absolutely fantastic. But after shooting wildlife in Pacific NorthWest as well as my native NW England, where it can often be cloudy and requiring ISO of 1600 and above to get decent shutter speed I had the same dilemma: different lens (300mm f2.8 or 400mm f4) or a 1Dx2. 

I finally plumped for the 400 f4 DOii and as it turns out factors other than low light came into it: the lens focuses quicker on the 7D2 than does the 100-400; and with a 1.4tc, the prime gives me 560 at f5.6 as opposed to 560 f8 with the zoom. 
But I can say with absolute certainty that the 1Dx2 took the zoom to another level (accuracy of focus and more keepers).

Then there is the eternal battle of number of pixels vs quality of pixels: in my experience the 7D2 can give more detail up to ISO 400, but as your remit (like mine) is ISO in low light, at ISO 1600+ the noise in the 7D2 overrides any pixel advantage it has. The pixel quality definitely shows.

One significant factor in my decision to get the lens was that there are plenty of decently priced second hand 1Dx out there so if the 7D2 remains a limiting factor I still have options on the body. There are no cheap options for the lens.

I can understand the appeal of the 200-400 and adding a tc, but I have corresponded with people who say a lot depends on where you go on safari (I haven't actually been there myself). Some areas you can get close enough that lenses of 500+ are just not needed and bigger lenses are hard to wield in the confines of a tourist truck so it may be worthwhile researching specific areas (and tour organisers) before committing to spending a few grand on either bit of kit.

I would hate to tell you which is better for your situation but I hope my recent experience helps.


----------



## Monte (Dec 14, 2016)

Thanks for the input guys. Yes, my thought was that the 5D mkiv with the better images at higher iso's would help "cheat" in place of gaining a stop of light with the EF200-400 over the EF100-400mkii lens. This would enable me to use higher iso's than I could get away with on the 7Dmkii, but again, less reach as well due to the crop factor. I'm also considering the 1DXmkii as well for it's superior factors in everything and still half the cost of the EF 200-400.
FEBS comment:
"Also the stop of difference between 100-400 and 200-400 on the long end means only about 10minutes more time during sunset, and most wildlife is all ready settling for the comming night at that moment. Masa Mari, has comparable light conditions with Uganda, and there the 100-400II will do a great job."

Thanks, this makes total practical sense in that all this concern and cost in reality may only gain me mere minutes at the end of the day for the stop of light difference.
As mentioned, I have the EF 400 f/2.8 mki lens and I played around with it having it on one tripod with a 7Dmkii and having my other 7Dmkii with the EF 100-400mkii on it right beside it with the cameras totally set up the same in all the settings and using auto exposure via auto iso adjustment and yea, as expected, big differences in the iso levels between the two! Makes it very hard to consider selling the 2.8 lens.  
Decisions, decisions!!!! I don't want to come home and load the pictures up on the computer and live with regrets on a likely once in a lifetime trip for the five of us.


----------



## lion rock (Dec 14, 2016)

Rent these lenses and try out.
I rented 300 2.8LII, 400 DOII and 200-400L. I can use the first two for a whole day without a tripod and not getting sore, but 5 minutes with the 200-400 handheld and my back hurt (I was using a monopod most of the shoot; unfortunately, on a boat, I couldn't do that, the image shifted with the boat movement).
A much as I love the zoom feature with the 200-400, it's really good lust for me. One of the first 2 selections remains on my GAS.
You have to decide for yourself in the end.
-r


----------



## Eldar (Dec 14, 2016)

Going to Masai Mara is pretty similar to Serengeti. So I had a look at the statistics from my October trip. I have deleted lots of images, so the total count is now down to 5.401 images, distributed as follows.

Cameras: 
1DXII; 4.347 images, 5DSR: 1054

Lenses: 
11-24; 6, 24-70/2.8L II; 322, 70-200/2.8L IS II; 251, 100-400 II; 15 (my wife used it on her 7DII, so it was not much available to me), 200-400/4L (no extender); 838, 200-400/5.6L (with extender); 2.168, 600/4L II; 220, 600/4L II + 1.4xIII; 1.239, 600/4L II + 2xIII; 342

ISO-distribution; 
100-320; 1.586, 400-640; 1752, 800; 493, 1000; 527, 1250; 433, 1600; 279, 2000; 140, 2500; 80, 3200; 38, 4000-20000; 73

As you can see from these, there is not a very high need for high ISO performance, with 80% at or below ISO1000. The reason is pretty simple. You are not allowed to go into the parks until 6 am, but you will most likely not get in there until the sun is up and you have to leave, or stop the game drive, by 6 pm, which is long before sunset. The main challenge you are facing is lots of very harsh light, with challenging shadows. 

As for lenses, I would clearly recommend the 200-400 f4L IS 1.4x. It is the king of safari lenses. You will be shooting from a vehicle, so don´t worry about weight. A 24-70 is good for landscapes and trip documentation and a 70-200/2.8 is always in my pack, even though I did not use it much this time. Bring a bean bag!

However, Masai Mara is open and you will see interesting things that will be far away. So it is tempting to be able to go further. You can add a 1.4xIII extender to the 200-400. You will see some drop in quality, but it is still very usable. As you can see from my statistics, I used the 600 with the 1.4xIII quite a lot. An alternative I would consider is to combine the 100-400 with a 600, plus the 1.4xIII and 2xIII extenders. 

One thing to be aware of is the problem of heat waves, haze and dust. During mid day, in most cases, the heat will make any long distance shooting quite useless. So very long lenses for that purpose is not very effective. However, for birds and close-ups, you will never get enough focal length.

For a camera, even though I am a total fan of my 1DX-II, I would strongly consider the 5DIV. Most of the shots will be in its ISO sweet spot and you have the best dynamic range in the Canon line up. 7fps will also be plenty for 99% of what you´ll see and you´ll have plenty of headroom for cropping, when needed. 

A good tip; Make sure you expose as much to the right as possible, without cutting off at the high end. That gives you much cleaner shadows to play with afterwards. And lifting shadows is unavoidable. The images may look horrible when reviewed in camera, but learn to trust your histogram.

And again; Don´t forget a bean bag!


----------



## ray5 (Dec 14, 2016)

Eldar said:


> Going to Masai Mara is pretty similar to Serengeti. So I had a look at the statistics from my October trip. I have deleted lots of images, so the total count is now down to 5.401 images, distributed as follows.
> 
> Cameras:
> 1DXII; 4.347 images, 5DSR: 1054
> ...



Eldar,
Would love to see your images from this trip!
Ray


----------



## Eldar (Dec 14, 2016)

ray5 said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > Going to Masai Mara is pretty similar to Serengeti. So I had a look at the statistics from my October trip. I have deleted lots of images, so the total count is now down to 5.401 images, distributed as follows.
> ...


Thanks! I have posted a few here, but the thread we used has been removed. You´ll find quite a few on my facebook site; Eldar Hauge Photography. Feel free to visit, like and share


----------



## ray5 (Dec 14, 2016)

Eldar said:


> ray5 said:
> 
> 
> > Eldar said:
> ...


I am too lazy/old for Facebook. Any on 500px or Flickr?


----------



## Eldar (Dec 14, 2016)

ray5 said:


> I am too lazy/old for Facebook. Any on 500px or Flickr?


He he, Too old? ...

You´ll find me on Flikr. Search for Eldar Hauge.


----------



## ray5 (Dec 14, 2016)

Eldar said:


> ray5 said:
> 
> 
> > I am too lazy/old for Facebook. Any on 500px or Flickr?
> ...



Not chronologically...... ??? but......


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Dec 14, 2016)

Eldar said:


> ray5 said:
> 
> 
> > I am too lazy/old for Facebook. Any on 500px or Flickr?
> ...



Looks like you had a good trip!


----------



## Grant Atkinson (Dec 15, 2016)

Monte said:


> Thanks for the input guys. Yes, my thought was that the 5D mkiv with the better images at higher iso's would help "cheat" in place of gaining a stop of light with the EF200-400 over the EF100-400mkii lens. This would enable me to use higher iso's than I could get away with on the 7Dmkii, but again, less reach as well due to the crop factor. I'm also considering the 1DXmkii as well for it's superior factors in everything and still half the cost of the EF 200-400.
> FEBS comment:
> "Also the stop of difference between 100-400 and 200-400 on the long end means only about 10minutes more time during sunset, and most wildlife is all ready settling for the comming night at that moment. Masa Mari, has comparable light conditions with Uganda, and there the 100-400II will do a great job."
> Hi Monte, i tried to send you an email, let me know if you received it
> ...


----------

