Canon (EF 100-400 L + EF 24-105) or EF 28-300

[peety3]

From Mike's perspective, which is probably true for most people, carrying two cameras is not a likely possibility.

It's entirely possible that the second camera stays in the bag, merely standing by as a spare. Our two 7D bodies are too new to have presented with any problems, but I can only assume that it WILL happen someday.

Ialso hate the zoom tension clutch, as it requires two hands to adjust, but walks loose all the time.

I use my 100-400mm a lot, and I think I've adjusted the tension ring all of two or three times.

I've rented it twice, and probably adjusted it at least two to three times per day it got used.

I'm going straight to the 300/4IS. After that is the 85L, and the 400/5.6. "But peety, why buy the 300/4 and the 400/5.6 when you could just buy the 100-400?" She "gets" the 300/4 (she needs IS more than I do - I can manage shutter speed better than her), and I "get" the 400.

IMO, the 100-400mm is the best choice for shooting wildlife while mobile. I had (and sold) the 300mm f/4L IS - as a prime, it lacked the flexibility I needed for wildlife and birds. If all I shot was birds primarily at a backyard feeder setup (I don't have one), the 300 f/4L would be a good choice. Likewise, it would be fine if, like you, I was carrying a second camera with my 70-200mm. Neither is the case. I'm not a big fan of the 400mm f/5.6 - that's a really long focal length to shoot without IS, no matter how steady your hands are. There's a reason it's got a reputation as a bird-in-flight lens, since you need those wing-stopping shutter speeds to handhold that lens in any case. The 100-400mm is the most affordable way to get IS in a 400mm lens without resorting to a teleconverter (and the IQ at 400mm is better than the 300mm f/4L IS + 1.4x Extender).
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

You're probably right about the 100-400's usefulness, especially for those not aspiring to pro careers and such. I see myself continuing to pour large amounts of money into my photography hobby/addiction, with the hopes of it becoming a side or even main career at some point. As such, the 100-400 isn't for me - I see the 300/4 and 400/5.6 as interim steps but both would likely stay in my inventory for a long time.


That said, I do still stand by my original comment: decide what lens to buy next, not what lenses. Buy, learn, evaluate what's lacking, decide, buy, learn, repeat. I started with a 24-105; three weeks later I rented the 16-35, 70-200/2.8IS, and 100-400; it was too much to juggle. I may have my next twenty lenses planned out on my wishlist (dreamlist?), but the only thing I'm focused on is when the Mrs. will allow me to buy the next one (EF-S 10-22).