Canon 200-400 ?

[Daniel Browning]

Also Daniel, did you intend to link a 300mm F/4 comparison or a F/2.8 comparison?

I did, thanks for the correction. (No wonder the comparison seemed more lopsided than I expected.)

[Mickw]

Hi guys, perhaps what i should have made more clear, i carry my 500 300 and a couple of cameras at the same time. Therefore the convenience of one lens over two plus the weight saving will help my old bones. As for the comparisons, what we never point out is what do you print on and to what size and for who. My friend gets his stuff in national newspapers so with the poor print quality the new lens makes no differance to him. I only print at A3 on a very good printer, so i wont notice any differance old to new unless i use extenders and the differance will be slight but will it be noticable? Barly if at all to the human eye. That said, if i was in magazines and wanted top of the line stuff for a publisher then id defiantly consider the trade. But for the average person printing for themselves, id never buy the new stuff as id struggle to notice any differance. Maybe ill wait until it hits the shelves, but for me, one lens less weight seems logical.

Oh, and if anyone knows, when will it hit the shelves?

Mick

[Daniel Browning]

Hi guys, perhaps what i should have made more clear, i carry my 500 300 and a couple of cameras at the same time.

No, I think you did a good job of making that clear. It does (or did) put you in the minority of photographers, though. Even the youngest of us are pretty wimpy about carrying that much weight and volume.

Therefore the convenience of one lens over two plus the weight saving will help my old bones.

Agreed. There is also the question is whether that one lens should be a zoom or a 300/2.8 (with TC to give you the longer focal lengths). The 300 will be noticeably lighter, and perhaps even cheaper and higher quality to boot. The zoom might be faster at focusing than the 300+1.4X though; we'd have to wait to see.

I only print at A3 on a very good printer, so i wont notice any differance old to new unless i use extenders and the differance will be slight but will it be noticable?

If the quality difference isn't important (and neither is the weight, autofocus speed, and other improvements of the new $7300 300/2.8) then you can just stay with your existing 300mm f/2.8.

The main point of what I'm saying is that you can save weight, reduce your lens count, pay less money, and still get better quality images without the zoom. So the only remaining reason to get the zoom is because it zooms. And that is definitely a good reason to get it.

But if you are fine with a prime, and you don't really need a zoom (as much as the other things like weight/quality), then it seems like a 300mm f/2.8 (new or old) with TC is a better fit for you.