Yahoo all for me.

[DarkShadow]

IMG_0003 by DarkShadow191145, on Flickr

 

[Juga]

Completely off topic but Dark I thought you were a Nikonian when did you become a Canonite?

 

[DarkShadow]

I still love Nikons but I wanted to upgrade from the D90 with more pixels, faster FPS and a 1/8000 shutter. Looking at the D7100 @1200.00 was a nice option but after careful consideration and not being invested in glass yet, the Canon 60D was a better option for what I wanted and has a better buffer at a much lower price point that can go towards glass. It may not have quit the dynamic range of the D7100 but it works really sweet and the AF is pretty fast.

 

[Juga]

The 60D is a great value right now. Congrats.

 

[DarkShadow]

Thank you Juga.

 

[sm4him]

But wait. How could you possibly have bought a new camera??? I don't remember seeing any 12-page threads from you asking for advice on whether you switch and which camera might be best for you (without, of course, any hint as to what you plan to shoot with said camera).

HOW could you make a decision like that without advice from all of us???

:lmao:

Congrats on the new gear; hope it's everything you want it to be!

Back to the photo: Sometimes I think it's a wonder that cardinals don't explode--the ones at my house will just about eat every last seed before they give up their spot on the pile!

 

[coastalconn]

Congrats in the new camera Dave. Now you need a 400 f5.6 and you will be in serious bird world

 

[DarkShadow]

Sorry Sharon I should Have asked all you guys first,I don't know what I was thinking or not thinking.

 

[DarkShadow]

Congrats in the new camera Dave. Now you need a 400 f5.6 and you will be in serious bird world

Thanks Kris I feel like a trader leaving the Nikon. Canon glass I was thinking I should get the 100 - 400 3.5 to 5.6 IS USM but also eyeing the sigma 150-500 OS

 

[coastalconn]

Everyone that I know personally and in forums prefers the 400 f5.6 over the 100-400. Even though it lacks IS.. Now that you have the Canon I wouldn't even think about the Sigma to be honest with you... one guy in particular had the 100-400 and got rid of it so he could get the 400 f5.6 and he feels it is much sharper.. did you see the video I was in a while back? My friend swears by the 400 f5.6 also...

 

[matthewo]

The 400 5.6 has to be the best value / size / iq combo canon has, wish nikon would make one. IMO the new 80-400 is ok, but $2600 come on, you can get a used 300mm 2.8 afs ii for a few hundred more

 

[DarkShadow]

Everyone that I know personally and in forums prefers the 400 f5.6 over the 100-400. Even though it lacks IS.. Now that you have the Canon I wouldn't even think about the Sigma to be honest with you... one guy in particular had the 100-400 and got rid of it so he could get the 400 f5.6 and he feels it is much sharper.. did you see the video I was in a while back? My friend swears by the 400 f5.6 also...

I did see the video,that was the lens tony has I think.

 

[DarkShadow]

The 400 5.6 has to be the best value / size / iq combo canon has, wish nikon would make one. IMO the new 80-400 is ok, but $2600 come on, you can get a used 300mm 2.8 afs ii for a few hundred more

Ok then maybe I should consider the 400mm then.I know fixed lens always seem better on optics.

 

[JacaRanda]

I agonized for quite some time on 100-400, 300 f4 and the 400 f5.6. I decided to get the 100-400 for my wife and it rarely comes off her camera. I then decided to get the 300 instead of the 400 only because of the minimum focusing distance. It was just a personal preference. I also take advantage of adding the 1.4 tc to it.

All in all, I think you would be happy with either 3. You will always want more reach no matter which one you get. None of them are the cure for good light, good positioning, good timing, and good luck! I expect miracles for anything that cost over 1K.