Hi all,


First, thanks very much for taking the time to share your experiences.


Only drawback is that it only has older 2 stop IS.


Of course, but it's better than no IS. :-)


but the 400 f/5.6 might be better, w/o the IS of course.


you'll find the 400/5.6L


I did try the 400mm 5.6. I liked how lightweight it is and I very much liked its IQ. And I did get some great shots with it. But, I found the lack of IS very limiting in lower light conditions (during which I really enjoy shooting). Clearly, I'm totally spoiled by the excellent IS on my 700-200 f4 IS.


or the 100-400 to be a better solution.


I haven't been enamored by the 100-400. The push/pull look awkward and the IS is apparently not much better than the 300mm f4. Additionally, the 300mm f4 will give me f4 at 300mm, which is a stop faster than the 100-400 at the same focal length.


You might be very happy with the 300mm on a crop body, however a lens
like this acts a whole lot different on FF. If you like the reach the
crop sensor gives you, you could be in for a surprise once you go FF.


The only problem is that you will be taking one step forward with this
longer 300mm lens and then when you put it on a FF Body, you will be
taking one step backwards regarding your desire for a longer lens.


It's real different world and if you really like long range, FF is something you really must get used to I think.


I totally understand the focal length differences between the crop and FF bodies. Right now my longest lens is the 70-200 (which has worked for me pretty well on my crop bodies). Which is also why I'm looking for a longer lens, 200mm will probably be a bit short on a FF.


I do own the 300mm f/2.8L IS on a 7D (1.6X) crop body and the image quality is outstanding


This lens is ridiculously sharp but also terribly heavy at 6 pounds.


I'd of course love to have the 300mm 2.8. But (a) I can't justify its price and (b) I don't want to carry it around.


Tony