# If you were dropping $5k...



## rmfagan (Sep 3, 2016)

Simple opinion question: I'm prepared to spend around $5000-ish on gear. I shoot in wildlife, landscape, city, starscapes, sports off and on, and a bit of portraiture.

Currently have: 1DX, 5D3; Rok 14, Rok 24, 16-35L IS, 24 TSE II, 24-70L II, 50 1.4, 70-200L IS II, 100L Macro, 1.4x III, 2x III, 600EX-RT x 3, ST-E3-RT, and great tripod setups.

What would you do (all options used)

Option 1: 300 IS II 

Option 2: 17 TSE, 85L II, & 100-400 II

Option 3: a different suggestion in keeping with the price range

Thanks in advance for the help!


----------



## Ryananthony (Sep 3, 2016)

Ive never understood these questions. Only you know where you feel you are lacking in gear.

Option 3.

Spend 5g on anything else in the world. Your camera gear isn't holding you back from anything.


----------



## Random Orbits (Sep 3, 2016)

100-400 II first. Love using it for soccer on the larger fields, zoos/general travel, landscapes, etc. That will also help you decide whether or not want to go to even longer focal lengths or faster long lenses.


----------



## pwp (Sep 3, 2016)

Your kit is perfect just as it is. It's already what a lot of photographers would dream of owning. 
Spend the money on travel to great locations.

-pw


----------



## telemaq76 (Sep 3, 2016)

if you ask, you dont need, then go travel and use your gear to take pictures.


----------



## rmfagan (Sep 3, 2016)

I appreciate the responses, and the ones suggestion travel are well advised, and well heeded. I have, and continue to, travel quite a bit. 

This lens exercise is one in which I'm buying in addition to travel; my time is already allocated and dictated for the next 14 months. 

My inclination is toward the 300 as it offers me both objective length, and an extended length relative to what I own, whereas the other options merely offer opportunities to make an admittedly already serviceable kit moreso.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 3, 2016)

Normally, one would buy equipment to address a need, not buy equipment just because its good, and look for a way to use it. That sounds like someone panicking as the fiscal year ends and they still have unused budget that they will lose if its not spent.

If your equipment does the job, then why. If its lacking, try to upgrade what you can.


----------



## IglooEater (Sep 3, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Normally, one would buy equipment to address a need, not buy equipment just because its good, and look for a way to use it. That sounds like someone panicking as the fiscal year ends and they still have unused budget that they will lose if its not spent.
> 
> If your equipment does the job, then why. If its lacking, try to upgrade what you can.



+1. Do you find yourself lacking something in any way for what you do?


----------



## dak723 (Sep 3, 2016)

If I had all the cameras and lenses you do - and had $5K to drop, I would donate it to the charity of my choice.

You obviously don't need anything and have far more than most of us.


----------



## danski0224 (Sep 3, 2016)

200 f/2 and an alert at Canon Price Watch. Canon extension tubes. 

Or seek out a 200 f/1.8 for less, but be aware of the fact that the f/1.8 is not supported by Canon and should something go wrong, it's most likely unrepairable.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 3, 2016)

rmfagan said:


> Simple opinion question: I'm prepared to spend around $5000-ish on gear. I shoot in wildlife, landscape, city, starscapes, sports off and on, and a bit of portraiture.
> 
> Currently have: 1DX, 5D3; Rok 14, Rok 24, 16-35L IS, 24 TSE II, 24-70L II, 50 1.4, 70-200L IS II, 100L Macro, 1.4x III, 2x III, 600EX-RT x 3, ST-E3-RT, and great tripod setups.
> 
> ...



Seems pretty clear. You have the astro / landscape end of things well, well covered, and your zooms will cover sports/wildlife that you can get close to. 

You need longer glass and that's about it as far as I can tell. 

- A


----------



## bholliman (Sep 3, 2016)

You do have a great list of gear and certainly have everything from 14-200mm well covered! But, you listed wildlife first in what you like to shoot. Your longest lens currently is only 200mm, which is really short for 90% of the wildlife I run across. The 70-200 works reasonably well with extenders, but for me it's pretty soft at 400mm with the 2xiii. So, if you are serious about wildlife, I'd recommend investing in some longer glass.

My recommendation would be #1, a 300 f/2.8 II, which with your extenders gives you:

300 f/2.8
420 f/4
600 f/5.6

600mm at the top end is still a little short for some wildlife, but will cover quite a bit. The 400mm DO II has also been on sale recently under $6K, so maybe another option. Normally there are some good deals on gear between now and Christmas, so I suggest monitoring prices on www.canonpricewatch.com and pounce when a good deal comes up.

I bought a 300 f/2.8 II 16 months ago and love it - its definitely my favorite lens. I use it for portraits and landscape in addition to wildlife, with the extenders it's really very versatile.


----------



## candc (Sep 6, 2016)

You could use a longer lens for your wildlife shooting. I would pick up the new tamron or the 100-400ii.


----------



## arbitrage (Sep 6, 2016)

candc said:


> You could use a longer lens for your wildlife shooting. I would pick up the new tamron or the 100-400ii.



I agree. You mention wildlife as your first thing but have nothing longer than the 70-200 (and TCs). If wildlife means mammals then that may be enough. If it includes birds then 100-400II or 300 2.8 would be my suggestions. Both will get you to ~600mm although f/8 vs f/5.6 vs size and weight are key factors to consider when choosing between those two.


----------



## Halfrack (Sep 6, 2016)

In system, the 11-24 and the 100-400 II are both a great addition, as would be a 5DsR and a 7D II (for reach, with the 1.4x and the 100-400).

Out of system, the 645Z used is less than 5K, toss in a few used 645A or 645FA lenses and you're set.


----------



## rmfagan (Sep 6, 2016)

Halfrack- thanks for that! I've definitely considered the 645 system(s). As I tend toward wildlife first and foremost, I'd have a hard time with that. And those lens prices for some of the newer 645, wow! I just shot a air show with a rented 100-400 II on my 1DX though and was fairly impressed, even with 1.4x III for parts of it! 

For all of the combativeness, CFB has a point, as do you, about the 11-24. I'll rent it and check it out. Thank you for bringing it to my attention! The 5DSr would likely be too divisive for me though... The 5Div is tempting.


----------



## Sabaki (Sep 6, 2016)

I get asked this question a lot by newbie photographers and what I normally explain to them is, what do you want to shoot.

Envision the image and aesthetics you wish to capture, then look to the gear you currently have. For example, you can't do macro with a 600mm lens, then you go buy a macro lens. You can't get the bokeh you want from a f/5.6 lens so you go buy something with a bigger aperture.

I'm looking at your kit and thinking WOW!!! I'd love half of it! Why not do day trips with no more than 2 lenses and appreciate them for what they deliver. After a month or so, perhaps you would recognize a gap in your kit and maybe that gap won't need $5000 to fill.


----------



## rmfagan (Sep 6, 2016)

Arbitrage- Thanks for the insight. I tend to agree. I'm missing the long end. That's why 300 II takes top billing in my options list. I do prefer wildlife, but often travel to shoot it, which makes a 600 quite difficult, and even a 500 limiting with regards to fitting other lenses. I've had fairly good success at 500-600 for the mammals and predatory birds I find myself drawn to photographing.

Likely, I'll take your, and other's, advice and take the plunge on the 300. Attached are few low res files of what I've managed between 500-700 thus far.

Thank you again for the response!


----------



## rmfagan (Sep 6, 2016)

Sabaki- I appreciate the feedback. I agree; finding the hole is usually best accomplished by shooting. My question is born of precisely that experience.

I have shot, and found lacking a longer telephoto option, a wider TSE, a dedicated portrait lens that doesn't intimidate subjects like the 70-200 can. 

It is for that reason I appeal to the collective wealth of knowledge here.


----------



## Sabaki (Sep 6, 2016)

rmfagan said:


> Sabaki- I appreciate the feedback. I agree; finding the hole is usually best accomplished by shooting. My question is born of precisely that experience.
> 
> I have shot, and found lacking a longer telephoto option, a wider TSE, a dedicated portrait lens that doesn't intimidate subjects like the 70-200 can.
> 
> It is for that reason I appeal to the collective wealth of knowledge here.



It sounds like you know your need then, perhaps it just requires you prioritizing which should be bought first.

May I suggest perhaps looking at the TSE17mm first? With $5000, you could probably pick up the lens and a filter set. It's the widest TSE out there so a definite tick on your wish list.

Unlike the TSEs, there are more options for telephotos and portrait lenses. Consider weight, 1st or 3rd party, max aperture, price, IS or no IS etc etc
Create a list of your preferred candidates then do some research. Each bit of information you gather could potentially scratch an option off of your list and once you have the money available, leave you with a more defined set of possibilities.

I don't know if you're like me but I tend to see things more clearly once I have a plan on a piece of paper.


----------



## George D. (Sep 6, 2016)

Hey! Stumbled into the above majestic bird shots. These deserve to be in the "show your bird" post, image properties on so we get some insight. 

For such diverse demanding needs from UWA to Super-tele there's no definitive kit unless you want to own the entire EF line plus some 3rd party stuff. I'd say best approach is have a core of 4-5 lenses and buy, sell or rent lenses around them at will. This year you have that kit, next the other. And everything depends on (frequency of) assignment.


----------



## hendrik-sg (Sep 6, 2016)

a 300 2.8 is a wonderful lens, but 200 2.8 is not so far away, and maybe 200+1.4 4.0 is not so far away either. 

i guess, you will never carry the 70-200 2.8 and a 300 2.8 at the same time (and some other lenses)

I switched a 70-200 4.0 IS for the new 100-400 which has fantastic IS. If you would like to go big/long, maybe stretch for a 500 4.0, which can give 1000mmm with AF. As it seems, you do not need it urgently, so maybe you can save money for some month longer


----------



## cdang (Sep 6, 2016)

17 TSE and 100-400 II

P.S if you were dropping 5K, make sure I'm there to catch it!


----------

