I'd like to buy a camera dedicated to wildlife and I'm thinking ...?

From my limited research it seems the best choices for APS-c bodies for wildlife would be the 7DII. I want the APS-c body for the extra reach the 1.5 crop offers plus the ability to use my 1.4x teleconverter with f/5.6 lenses. From what I've read they both have fast af, and tracking birds and other animals plus children and grandchildren works well with these bodies. I currently own a refurbished 70D purchased from Canon's online store when the 70D was offered as a refurbished body for $699.00. I'm thinking the best wildlife APS-c bodies would be the 7DII, followed by the 80D. Would the 80D be a good low cost option? I'd also like to know if the 80D with the DIGIC 6 processor allows autofocus with f/5.6 lenses with the Canon 1.4x teleconverter? I have an opportunity in the near future to buy the Canon 400 f/5.6. Before anyone says use the 70D I'll have to tell you my granddaughter is getting it in a few weeks when I go down to Sebring, Florida to see her for Thanksgiving. Looking forward to reading your comments. Thanks, Mark

I don’t do wildlife, but my choise would be either the 7D mkII or if budget is higher the 5D mkIV.

Can't speak to Canon, (Nikon guy) already had FX cameras but got a D 7200 for the 1.5 factor. It has met my needs very nicely, from macro to wildlife, to the Moon. Wish I'd thought about it sooner.

Canon APS-C is actually x1.6 crop, Nikon APS-C is x1.5 crop.

 

While the x1.6 crop actually does not get you any closer to the subject than full frame, it will capture a higher resolution image across the same x1.6 crop area seen through the lens. I made this diagram to better explain what is happening comparing the 5D Mark IV vs the 7D MK II. The wild life captured across that x1.6 crop area is almost twice the resolution as the full frame so it seems like you are getting more reach. But the full frame when using the full frame will get higher overall resolution. The APS-C camera does not use the entire lens, just the center of it.

 

This explains why the crop sensor is prefered for wildlife where needing the extra reach is often a concern. Hope I got these numbers right and this makes sense.

 

Edited October 22, 2018 by Mark Keefer

Correction: I made a couple minor recalculations of the math to the above chart, because there is a difference between the cameras advertised sensor megapixels and the actual image megapixels.

 

From the Canon 5D MK IV specs page, the 5D Mark IV has a 30.4 megapixel sensor and records a 30.1 megapixel image. Where do the missing 0.3 megapixels go? It is somewhere in the engineering processing and sales marketing idioms. The same holds true for other cameras as well. But what is a few hundred thousand pixels among friends. ;) Still I want to share this link and update my chart for a little more approximate accuracy.

 

 

Thanks, Mark.

 

I just love charts, graphs, and illustrations! :)

 

My usual travel kit is a 24-36mm image camera with a wide to short tele (24-105) and a fairly recent APS-C camera with a 100-400mm (Mk I) tele.

 

It's the human element that places limitation on use.

Thanks, Mark.

 

I just love charts, graphs, and illustrations! :)

 

My usual travel kit is a 24-36mm image camera with a wide to short tele (24-105) and a fairly recent APS-C camera with a 100-400mm (Mk I) tele.

 

It's the human element that places limitation on use.

 

Thanks JD. APS-C cameras are great, I shot with them for a lot of years, just different tools than full frame cameras. EF lenses behave a bit differently on APS-C than on full frame too. Putting EF lenses on APS-C camera is putting big expensive glass on a small camera. The nice thing is it doesn't matter and you get to use both EF and EF-S.

The smaller EF-S lenses are usually a bit more affordable.

 

When I switched to full frame I sold all my EF-S lenses. I miss some of them, but found other EF lenses that give similar results on the full frame. Both systems have their advantages and really you can get similar shots, you just have change the distance from the subject.

 

It is interesting I did the comparison with the 7D Mark II and the Sony A7RIII with pixel resolution across the x1.6 crop and the 7D Mark II still has more pixel resolution across that x1.6 area than the the 42 megapixel Sony A7RIII. The Sony A7RIII large image is 7,952 x 5,304 pixels. The number of pixel the Sony has across the x1.6 crop equivalent is 4,970 x 3,315 pixel which equals 16,475,550 pixels or approximately a 16.47 megapixel image.

 

The Canon 7D MK IIs 19.96 megapixel image is still going to give you more detail with the same lens taken from the same spot.

 

I would say the Canon 7D MK II is a good choice for wildlife and every day shooting. Personally, I got great images from my 40D and 7D classic. It will be interesting to what the specs on the Canon 7D MK III will be when it comes out. Higher res, better ISO? Wonder if it will be mirrorless? Sensor stabilization? Who knows?

Hmm; camera dedicated to wildlife? Maybe talk to this lady: Monkey selfie copyright dispute - Wikipedia Edited October 23, 2018 by Sandy Vongries

I'd skip the 7Dii - it's old and the image quality doesn't hold up to the sensor of the 80D. Give the 5DmkIV some serious consideration - I've been using it alongside a pair of 1DxII's and the 5DmkIV holds its own against the big boys.

If you can get Canon 1D mark 4 in good condition for reasonable price, that's the best wildlife and speedy kids camera:)

The 5D MkIV has two main advantages over the 7D MkII. One is the hugely superior dynamic range and high-ISO performance, which you'll need for shooting wildlife and dawn and dusk at decent shutter speeds. The second is a very superior AF in all conditions, but particularly low light. The first night that I had my 5D MkIV, I was shooting a large white-tail buck in low light, using the EF 500mm II, while two buddies were shooting the EF 100-400mm II on their 7D MkIIs. They didn't get any useable shots. I got several nice shots, like this:

 

Big Buck After Sundown by David Stephens, on Flickr

 

I never used my 7D MkII again.

How about micro 4/3, 2x crop factor helps with the LONG lenses.

A 300mm lens is similar to a 600mm lens on a FF camera.

Both smaller and lighter, which makes a difference on a LONG hike, or if you are a senior citizen (like me).

 

Olympus EM1 or EM5 + Olympus 75-300 or Panasonic 100-300.

primarily wildlife ?

 

I'll vote Canon 80D and a long telephoto - Sigma 150-600 "C" or Canon 100-400

 

Untitled by c w, on Flickr