EF 70-300 IS USM or EF 70-200 f/4L USM or ...?

[EricPvpi]

andnowimbroke - If the last question was for me...

I think my initial thought was the EF-S 70-300 based on pricing, having IS, and my beginner status. On B&H it is currently $549.

Close in price is the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM at $674 (no IS). Based on sharpness in the right conditions, the extra money would be worth it. So right now, after reading comments and reviews, my concern of going the L route would be the loss of IS and what that means for me.

[neuroanatomist]

Based on sharpness in the right conditions, the extra money would be worth it. So right now, after reading comments and reviews, my concern of going the L route would be the loss of IS and what that means for me.

You mention shooting "outdoors, wildlife, kid activities etc." My rank ordered recommendation in your position would be EF 70-200mm f/4L > EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS > EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS.

Getting the bottom two out of the way first, I think for use on a crop body, there's not a lot of difference between the two lenses. IQ is generally similar, neither has stellar build, neither has full time manual focus, both have rotating front elements, etc. The EF-S lens is a lot cheaper, which means more money for other things (like saving up for the L lens that you will very likely replace it with eventually!).

I'd recommend the 70-200mm f/4L for several reasons. It's got better IQ - for me, at least, that's usually the most important characteristic. It's faster - f/4 all through the range vs. f/5.6 at the longer end (which is where you need it to be faster, usually), and that stop can make a big difference. Seems you'll mostly be using the lens outdoors (which I agree with - I found the 70-200mm range too long for convenient indoor use on my 7D), and outdoors usually has a fair bit of light, at least when kids are playing (not really talking youth sports here, because then even f/4 won't usually cut it). The lack of IS is an issue, yes - but a surmountable one. Mi reasoning is that out at >150mm, you'd want 1/320 s for handholding on APS-C, and that's at f/5.6 with the other two lenses. Now, 3 stops of IS will allow you to handhold down to 1/40 s - but that's way too slow for something like a moving kid (even a kid 'holding still' usually needs 1/60 s or better yet 1/100 s, at least, mine do!). The extra stop of f/4 vs. f/5.6 means you can shoot at 1/320 s where the f/5.6 lens would already be down at 1/160 s and needing IS. I've got the f/2.8 IS II version of the 70-200mm f/2.8, but looking over my shots, the ones in daytime were almost always in enough light for 1/320 s at f/4 with ISO 1600 (which is usable with a decent RAW converter - something like DxO or LR will beat out DPP, and you should definitely be shooting RAW if you'll be using higher ISOs - with DxO, 3200 is ok on my 7D, and that's the same sensor as your camera).

Hope that helps...