Ok lets get right into it.
Camera - Canon 70D
I have been a long term canon user since I first bought a digital camera in 2005. For me this was a game changer with the groundbreaking Canon 10D. I loved this camera and it was built like a tank, in fact I think its body shell was more on a par with the top end professional cameras of today. As technology progressed I moved to the Canon 50D and finally to my current body the Canon 70D.
I will admit to a brief fling with Nikon in 2013 when I switched to a Nikon D700. I am not a photographer who believes in this Canon/Nikon feud. The Nikon was a fine camera and my only issue with it was that for me although all the features I wanted where there, they always seemed a little difficult to get to compared to the Canon I was used to.
The Canon 70D is a lovely camera to work with. For me I find the touch screen a great asset, as is the ability to move the screen at all angles. This feature comes into it's own when you are crawling around doing macro photography. Build quality is good but I do look back with fondness to the tank like construction of the old 10D. Funnily enough I had the chance to get hold of an old 10D body the other week and it feels twice as robust as the 70D. I am actually due to upgrade to the canon 7D Mk 2 at some point but keep putting it off. I have to say the 7D Mk2 outclasses the 70D, as it should, however I find the swivel screen on the 70D such an asset I am reluctant to let it go for the fixed screen of the 7D Mk 2.
Big Lens - Canon 100-400 Mk 1
Where do I start with this one! I have had a lot of the sensibly priced telephoto lenses. I started with a Sigma 170-500. This was out of date when I bought it and I had my first encounter with a sparrowhawk with this lens. I thought I had some superb images only to find that they where all slightly out of focus. Apparently it needed re-chipping for a digital camera hence the OOF images. I wasn't pleased but it performed well enough after that.
Canon 100 - 400 Mk 1 Twice. Both have been good performers despite them getting mixed reviews. I think it may be down to the luck of the draw as to weather you get a good copy.
Nikon 300 F4 with teleconverter. Another great lens and I had no complaints.
Tamron 150-600. This lens was a surprise. The picture of the kestrel on the post was taken with it that leaps out at you when you enter my website. I don't think I realised how good it was until I upgraded to the lens below. This may also explain when I felt the next lens was so short after the 600mm. Build quality was not on a par with Canon and it felt pretty plastic in the hand, but it took some cracking images.
Canon 100 - 400 Mk 2. Now this might be controversial but I never got on with this lens. I know people rave about it but my first bugbear with it is the reach. Is it actually 400mm? I have seen loads of reviews that say its more like 370mm. Now to be honest a 400mm lens itself can leave you wanting a bit more reach on some occasions but to be using a 400mm that's short is a bit of a con. I also didn't rate the picture quality as hugely better than anything else I'd used. Anyway I would let you decide if it's really worth the £2000 price tag.
After having a break from wildlife photography for a while I ended up getting an old Sigma 50-500 (Bigma) from a sale at work. It was now I realised the full value of image stabilisation! This lens was one of the first versions and didn't come with Sigma's OS system. Don't get me wrong it was capable of taking a nice image, but you had to have perfect conditions, and unfortunately as a wildlife photographer this is not often the case.
My current lens see's me go back to a Canon 100-400 Mk1 and to be honest at the minute you would do well to part me from it. I think I again must have a good copy. image quality is superb and the two stop image stabilisation has not let me down yet. It cost me less than a third of the price of the Mk 2 and doesn't feel short!
Macro Lens - Canon EF 100mm USM
This is quite an old lens and has no image stabilisation. Until recently it seems that an image stabiliser was not thought necessary on a macro lens. To be honest I have had an Old Tamron 90mm and a Sigma 105mm They have all performed well. Again the Tamron was a surprise as I picked it up really cheaply and it provided some lovely images. I would only say that the build quality of the Canon is great and is a notch above the other two. To be honest I would happily shoot with any of them!
General purpose Lens - Canon EFS 17-55
I upgraded to this lens from the kit lens that came with the 70D Build quality is good but not quite matching that of the professional range. It is a nice lens with a useful range. I really like it because for me it has never failed quality control when submitting to stock libraries. Now this may be a fluke but although I could see little difference I used to get regular fails with the kit lens.
And that is it for my camera and lens combinations. I don't keep loads of lenses because you don't use or carry them and I have found that this combination covers most of the situations I get into. Please feel free to contact me if you want to know more about this kit or which images on my website were shot with what. Next time I will look at all of my ancillary stuff that I use to take my images from tripods to bags and even clothing.
All the Best for your Photography!