# 5d mark III + 300mm F4 IS + tc 1.4x II



## lycan (Sep 21, 2013)

Tired of waiting for the new 400mm f/4 IS or 400mm f5.6 IS or the new 100-400mm, I'm thinking about upgrading to full frame

I do lots of bird photography (to me, that's the main reason for a telephoto), but not always, so good high-iso performance is a factor.

Is the combo mentioned in the topic a good one?

thanks


----------



## Mr Bean (Sep 21, 2013)

For birding, that's pretty much the combo I have (except I have the series III of the 1.4TC). It generally works well, but I've learnt to stop down a little (usually I run it at 2/3 stop down) to help with the sharpness and slightly better DOF. Perhaps its just my technique, but running the combination at f5.6 (fully open) seems to give me fewer tack sharp images. For birding, I would normally run the 5D3 at an ISO of 400 with no issues IQ wise. I can push it to ISO 1600 and still have good results (but there's usually a bit more work in post).

I have 2 of the custom settings on the camera setup for birding pic's, depending on the conditions. Essentially, the only difference is a spot focus (for birds in bushes / trees) or a group focus (9 points) for more open terrain (no trees).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 22, 2013)

I had a 300/4L IS + 1.4xII, I replaced the 300/4 IS with a 100-400L. I found the 100-400 to have better IQ at 400/5.6 than the 300/4 + 1.4x at 420/5.6, and the IS is the same (well, the 100-400 is quieter than the 300/4's CLUNK-growwwwwwl IS sound, but equivalent stabilization). The 100-400 focuses slightly faster than the 300+TC (the bare 300 is faster than the 100-400). The 100-400 sometimes hunts for focus in complex settings (birds in thickets), so does the 300+1.4, the bare 300 is better there.


----------



## Canon1 (Sep 22, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> I had a 300/4L IS + 1.4xII, I replaced the 300/4 IS with a 100-400L. I found the 100-400 to have better IQ at 400/5.6 than the 300/4 + 1.4x at 420/5.6, and the IS is the same (well, the 100-400 is quieter than the 300/4's CLUNK-growwwwwwl IS sound, but equivalent stabilization). The 100-400 focuses slightly faster than the 300+TC (the bare 300 is faster than the 100-400). The 100-400 sometimes hunts for focus in complex settings (birds in thickets), so does the 300+1.4, the bare 300 is better there.



This is what I have found as well. Both options are good, however the zoom does give you a little more flexibility while in the field.


----------



## lycan (Sep 22, 2013)

Thanks for your input. For now I will have to stick with the 300mm F4

Since I'll be using a 300mm, I suspect I will have to crop more than with a aps-c sensor and theoretically that will produce images with less definition/detail at the center than those from a crop sensor. Do you guys find that noticeable and a disadvantage or only pixel peepers do so?

Thanks


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 22, 2013)

lycan said:


> Since I'll be using a 300mm, I suspect I will have to crop more than with a aps-c sensor and theoretically that will produce images with less definition/detail at the center than those from a crop sensor. Do you guys find that noticeable and a disadvantage or only pixel peepers do so?



A 5DIII image cropped to the APS-C FoV yields an 8.6 MP image that has equivalent IQ at low ISOs, and progressively better IQ as the ISO is raised higher than 800. So, if ~8 MP is sufficient for your output (up to 16x24" / A2 prints), then the 'reach advantage' of a crop sensor is an illusion.


----------



## Canon1 (Sep 22, 2013)

I'm not sure which crop camera you currently use, but I find that when I crop a 5DIII to the same FOV as a 1DIV or a 7D that despite having fewer pixels on that same FOV, that the image quality is superior and more detail is retained at all ISO's but primarily at higher ISO's. The 5DIII high ISO noise is much more manageable as well. Crop until your heart's content.


----------



## lycan (Sep 23, 2013)

Canon1 said:


> I'm not sure which crop camera you currently use, but I find that when I crop a 5DIII to the same FOV as a 1DIV or a 7D that despite having fewer pixels on that same FOV, that the image quality is superior and more detail is retained at all ISO's but primarily at higher ISO's. The 5DIII high ISO noise is much more manageable as well. Crop until your heart's content.



That was what I thought. I've made my mind now

thanks


----------

