Which is the better upgrade: EOS 5DS R or EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM?

[dcwidman]

I have the 5D Mark II with a 100-400 mm lens (the old version). As a wildlife photographer, which would be the better upgrade, the EOS 5DS R or EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM?

[ebiggs1]

Alway, always the lens.  Lenses are where its at.  Comparing a 100-400mm to a 400mm DO is even more compelling to go for the lens.

[dcwidman]

I always assumed lens upgrade first. In this case I was impressed by the new features of the 5DS R because I photograph small birds, often in trees, often at a distance of 30-50 feet, and almost always moving around. I thought the 61 point high density reticular AF might be quick enough to get a photo (that my current set up can't get) and with a file that would allow severe cropping which would make up for the distance.

On the other hand, photographing birds in riparian areas where there is usually poor lighting might suggest the better lens is the answer. 

That's basically why I thought to ask others.

[dcwidman]

I always assumed lens upgrade first. In this case I was impressed by the new features of the 5DS R because I photograph small birds, often in trees, often at a distance of 30-50 feet, and almost always moving around. I thought the 61 point high density reticular AF might be quick enough to get a photo (that my current set up can't get) and with a file that would allow severe cropping which would make up for the distance.

On the other hand, photographing birds in riparian areas where there is usually poor lighting might suggest the better lens is the answer. 

That's basically why I thought to ask others.

[jazzman1]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

Alway, always the lens.  Lenses are where its at.  Comparing a 100-400mm to a 400mm DO is even more compelling to go for the lens.

---

Thanks Biggs and guys, good to know.  I'll file away for future reference that a lens upgrade is always the better.

[ebiggs1]

Oh, man, I can see right now   I should have qualified that statement.  You do have to use some common sense here.

Obiviously going from a EF 24-70 f2.8 to a EF-S 18-55mm would not.

[MHampton]

Agree. You "usually" get the most bang for the buck with better glass. I have the 5DmII and also the 7DmII and if I were going to upgrade the body for wildlife, I'd go with the 7DmII. It has the same pixel density of the 5Dsr but you get the 1.6 crop factor for about half the price. I'm loving my 7DmII for birds and wildlife.

I have a 5Dsr on order, but it will be more for landscape work.

[MHampton]

I'm not sure if I'm thinking of this right or not, but if the 7DmII has the same pixel density, if you cropped a 5Dsr photo by 1.6 wouldn't you have essentially the same photo? If you're looking at getting it for cropping I would suggest the 7DmII for half the price. I love mine for birds.