Quote Originally Posted by Jordan
The 300mm is the same length, but a little thinner and MUCH lighter. Built in lens hood which is cool/nice. The images it takes are stunning and IS is the best I've seen yet.

Just want to ask for clarification, 1) we're talking 48 oz. vs 42 oz. here, 12.5% lighter. I carried each around on hikes of several hours, and didn't notice a significant difference. Also, 2) do you mean the IS in the 300mm f/4L is the best? Compared to what? It's an old implementation of IS; the newest lenses provide 2 more stops of stabilization, and are faster and quiter.


One more viewpoint, shared from some I chatted with on the FM forums. He shoots wildlife, has an 800mm lens on one body. For his second body, he previously used a 100-400mm. About 3 months ago, he traded his 100-400mm for a 300mm f/4L IS + 1.4x TC. Now, he's trying to sell/trade back the 300+1.4x combo and go back to the 100-400mm.