# Lens to body pairing



## Valvebounce (Aug 19, 2014)

Hi Folks. 
I am going to the Bournemouth air festival, for those that don't know it is a free display with the aircraft flying over the coast, no access to parked aircraft as far as I am aware.
I would like to know the thoughts of those wiser than myself on which lens to put with which body for best image quality? 
My thoughts are:-

Bodies lenses
7D With EF 70-200 f2.8 IS II with or without EF 2X III depending on how close or far the planes are. 
40D With Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3 DG OS HSM

Please could I have your thoughts on whether this is right or wrong! 
Is it worth having the extra camera just for the extra 100mm? 
I am looking to get a Black Rapid Double for carrying both, as it converts neatly to a single too when I only want to carry one body. Thoughts on that? 
Anyone been and able to tell me if I will need the 2X III on the 70-200 or not? 
Thanks in advance for your input. 

Cheers Graham.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Aug 19, 2014)

I was at the Weston Super Mare show and go to the Swansea show as well. These are similar coastal events. I use a full frame camera with a Canon 300mm F2.8 L IS for the larger aircraft and add a 2 x Mk3 extender for the small aircraft (or a 1.4 if I am near the center of the flight line). Your 70-200 will give you excellent results but bring along the Sigma for when it's too short. You will have plenty of time to change lenses so I would suggest just taking the 7D.


----------



## dhr90 (Aug 19, 2014)

I went to Farnborough with a 7D, 70-200II and 2xIII, I kept the TC on for 60% of the day I think. Didn't need it with the Vulcan. Whilst I did occasionally want more reach, it was only the smallest of planes (WW1 battle recreation) and when the Harrier was hovering (I was just too far down one end of the runway). With things like the Red Arrows, some of the wider shots I took were at 70mm to get more of the overall formation in, I don't know if you shoot that type of shot, but its worth considering.

I'd have thought you could crop from 400 on the 7D to get the equivalent of the 40D + Sigma combo without too much loss of quality? Would save on carrying an extra lens/camera!

Wish I could go to this but I'm working sadly. Going to Clacton on Sea on thursday though, looking forward to the Vulcan again (who doesn't  ) but I wish they could have got the P51, that put on a great performance last year!


----------



## helpful (Aug 19, 2014)

I would recommend the Sigma 150-500, with a caveat that I don't actually have it, but that I have tried your other alternative and it doesn't really do it for me in that situation.

At the focal lengths where it really matters, I feel confident that you would get better plane pictures both optically from the 150-500 lens and physically from being able to handle / pan / zoom, *especially *at the 500mm end which is really what you need for taking really good plane photos. Even a "wide angle" plane photo with several planes is going to call for a very long focal length, unless the planes are extremely close (roaring in your ear drums kind of close).

I doubt that the 70-200mm with the 2x extender (resulting in 400mm) is going to compare to the quality of the image you'll get with the 150-500 lens at 500mm with no extenders.


UPDATE: I think I'm wrong. I had heard that the 150-500 was really a pretty great lens overall, but I have just Googled some image comparisons and some of them seem to show that the 70-200 II is sharper, even with the disadvantage of a 2x teleconverter attached, and even comparing Canon details at 400mm equivalent focal length vs. Sigma details at a true focal length of 500mm.

(And if those comparisons I read are true, then really 150-500 lens is NOT a great lens at all like a lot of people have been saying, but a terrible lens.)

All that I can say based on my personal experience is that I am NOT satisfied with the quality of the 70-200mm II in this kind of situation with teleconverters. But the 150-500mm might be even worse.


----------



## Valvebounce (Aug 21, 2014)

Hi Folks. 



johnf3f said:


> I was at the Weston Super Mare show and go to the Swansea show as well. These are similar coastal events. I use a full frame camera with a Canon 300mm F2.8 L IS for the larger aircraft and add a 2 x Mk3 extender for the small aircraft (or a 1.4 if I am near the center of the flight line). Your 70-200 will give you excellent results but bring along the Sigma for when it's too short. You will have plenty of time to change lenses so I would suggest just taking the 7D.



Thanks for the info.
The last time I did an event like thus was the flying boat seaplane event at Southampton Water, I was shooting film and video alternately, neither of which turned out well due to loss of focus on the event. 
I am very wary of deciding in advance to change lenses on the beach in case the wind should get up, salt and sand are bad enough on the outside, on the inside it would be terrible! 
Plus I have had a couple of camera failures, one the 40D shutter failed and I had to resort to my 300D, the other was Magic Lantern, the 7D and my brain not playing well together, I wasn't ready to go live with ML and between us I had my 7D doing strange things and had to uninstall ML right at the crucial point in a ceremony to get a normal functioning camera back, fortunately I was carrying the 40D so used that whilst the 7D recovered! 



dhr90 said:


> I went to Farnborough with a 7D, 70-200II and 2xIII, I kept the TC on for 60% of the day I think. Didn't need it with the Vulcan. Whilst I did occasionally want more reach, it was only the smallest of planes (WW1 battle recreation) and when the Harrier was hovering (I was just too far down one end of the runway). With things like the Red Arrows, some of the wider shots I took were at 70mm to get more of the overall formation in, I don't know if you shoot that type of shot, but its worth considering.
> 
> I'd have thought you could crop from 400 on the 7D to get the equivalent of the 40D + Sigma combo without too much loss of quality? Would save on carrying an extra lens/camera!
> 
> Wish I could go to this but I'm working sadly. Going to Clacton on Sea on thursday though, looking forward to the Vulcan again (who doesn't  ) but I wish they could have got the P51, that put on a great performance last year!



Thank you for your thoughts. 
When I was at the Southampton event the Harrier hovered right in front of me, I had to cover the camera for most of the performance and turn my back during the bow due to the grit and salt spray thrown up! I love the Vulcan, such a beautiful aircraft, and the noise well..... 
I do take shots of the overall display for things like the Red Arrows, also I might get some general wide angles of the crowd. I was not sure I would need the 2x III but from what you say I guess I will most of the time, I will be adding/removing it as little as possible, see reason above! 



helpful said:


> I would recommend the Sigma 150-500, with a caveat that I don't actually have it, but that I have tried your other alternative and it doesn't really do it for me in that situation.
> 
> At the focal lengths where it really matters, I feel confident that you would get better plane pictures both optically from the 150-500 lens and physically from being able to handle / pan / zoom, *especially *at the 500mm end which is really what you need for taking really good plane photos. Even a "wide angle" plane photo with several planes is going to call for a very long focal length, unless the planes are extremely close (roaring in your ear drums kind of close).
> 
> ...



Thanks for your input. 
I will say that the 150-500 responds well to AFMA, the images I got in the past were not great, but since FoCal entered my arsenal and tested the 150-500 the images are sharper, though not on the same level as the 70-200 with 2x.
I was thinking of ditching the 150-500 but it is with me for the foreseeable future now, the quality is not that bad if you can't afford Canon glass of a similar focal length! ;D
As for how close the planes are, I think from what I have heard that they are pretty darn close to the crowd, statements like they flew over the pier place them pretty close, but then one persons view of them flying past the end of the pier is another persons view of them flying over the pier! :

So no one would pair the cameras and lenses the other way round then?

Cheers, Graham.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 21, 2014)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi Folks.
> I am going to the Bournemouth air festival, for those that don't know it is a free display with the aircraft flying over the coast, no access to parked aircraft as far as I am aware.
> I would like to know the thoughts of those wiser than myself on which lens to put with which body for best image quality?
> My thoughts are:-
> ...



The 100-400mm L is a very popular airshow lens, so I'd think that you would want that focal length and range. a 70-200 with 1.4X on a crop body might be just fine, since you get a 160-448 FF equivalent, and much better IS and lower ISO or faster shutter speed.


----------



## Canon1 (Aug 21, 2014)

I would ditch the sigma... Permanently. The 70-200 is a sharper more responsive lens even with a 2x. Cropping that at 400 to the same fov as the 500 sigma will yield a better image, and your keeper rate will be higher. I'd bring the 40d along as a backup body. That's what I would do.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Aug 21, 2014)

I have used the combination 7D + EF 70-200 f2.8 IS II with EF 2X III and provides very good results in terms of sharpness and image quality. You'll not be dissapointed. 
And without the teleconverter the EF 70-200 f2.8 IS II is one of the sharpest lenses in Canon line-up.


----------



## Valvebounce (Aug 21, 2014)

Hi Mt Spokane. 
Thanks for your advice, unfortunately I don't have the option of a 1.4x III as I had to make a choice between the 1.4 and 2x and as I always seem to be looking for length I went for the 2x. At some point I would like to add both of those items to my arsenal, until then I have to work with what I have! 

Cheers, Graham. 



Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The 100-400mm L is a very popular airshow lens, so I'd think that you would want that focal length and range. a 70-200 with 1.4X on a crop body might be just fine, since you get a 160-448 FF equivalent, and much better IS and lower ISO or faster shutter speed.


----------



## Valvebounce (Aug 21, 2014)

Hi Canon1. 
Thanks for that advice, it certainly seems to be the consensus to not carry the Sigma. I have to get past the mental block that 500 is better than 400 cropped, I just can't seem to prove the point to myself, I accept that I have a poor but improving technique which is probably holding the 200+2x back and I have not got round to doing direct comparison shots from a tripod to convince myself. Perhaps I should carry the 40D with a wider lens for the scene shots?



Canon1 said:


> I would ditch the sigma... Permanently. The 70-200 is a sharper more responsive lens even with a 2x. Cropping that at 400 to the same fov as the 500 sigma will yield a better image, and your keeper rate will be higher. I'd bring the 40d along as a backup body. That's what I would do.



Hi Hjalmarg1. 
I can confirm that I am very happy so far with the 70-200 2x combination, and to me the lens on its own seems stellar, I couldn't be happier with it. 
I think I might now be going with 

Bodies lenses
7D With EF 70-200 f2.8 IS II with or without EF 2X III
40D With Sigma 17-70 for the ambiance shots, (it seems to make more sense than carrying a backup body with only a body cap on it.)

Cheers, Graham. 



Hjalmarg1 said:


> I have used the combination 7D + EF 70-200 f2.8 IS II with EF 2X III and provides very good results in terms of sharpness and image quality. You'll not be dissapointed.
> And without the teleconverter the EF 70-200 f2.8 IS II is one of the sharpest lenses in Canon line-up.


----------

