I am having some thoughts about rationalising my camera kit as nowadays I tend to carry a Crumpler shoulder bag rather than a rucksack as it saves weight, is easier to access and doesn't scream "photographer" out to everyone.
My typical day kit would be my 17-40 f4 my 70-200 f4 IS together with a 1.4x and depending on where I am going my Macro comes along as well. This tends to leave my 300 f4 IS sitting at home in the cupboard most of the time.
So thought is to consolidated the 70-200 and the 300 into a 70-300 f4-5.6 L. A big decision as this option loses me 1 f stop however I will always have that extra reach without fiddling around with a converter. This lens gets some brilliant reviews when paired with a 7D and it sounds like an ideal solution.
I love photographing dragonflies, bees, flowers, abstract and all things nature but not birds as even the 300 is not long enough and when paired with the 1.4 the image quality even in good light with a solid monopod/bean bag is naff.
Your opinions would be useful in helping me to make this difficult decision.
My typical day kit would be my 17-40 f4 my 70-200 f4 IS together with a 1.4x and depending on where I am going my Macro comes along as well. This tends to leave my 300 f4 IS sitting at home in the cupboard most of the time.
So thought is to consolidated the 70-200 and the 300 into a 70-300 f4-5.6 L. A big decision as this option loses me 1 f stop however I will always have that extra reach without fiddling around with a converter. This lens gets some brilliant reviews when paired with a 7D and it sounds like an ideal solution.
I love photographing dragonflies, bees, flowers, abstract and all things nature but not birds as even the 300 is not long enough and when paired with the 1.4 the image quality even in good light with a solid monopod/bean bag is naff.
Your opinions would be useful in helping me to make this difficult decision.
Comment