EF 300mm f/4L IS USM or EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM?

[neuroanatomist]

Hi Everyone,


I'm debating between these two lenses for nature photography, some wildlife, and perhaps a bird or two although that last is not my main interest. I've got excellent primes at the lower end of the 100-400 zoom range (EF 100mm f/2.8<span style="color: red;"]LMacro IS USM and EF 200mm f/2.8<span style="color: red;"]LII USM).


I'm being somewhat opportunistic here, since I currently have the opportunity to pick up a used but in like-new conditionEF 100-400mm for a fair bit less than the cost of a newEF 300mm f/4L. However, I'm not in a huge rush here, so if I miss that opportunity, I'll survive. [] But I'll still have this decision to make...


Thoughts and input will be appreciated!


Thanks,


--John

[Ehcalum]

I have the 300 F4 (non IS) and have used the 100-400 many times as the studio owns one. The 100-400 is a nifty lens, but its a pain to use with a 1.4 converter. I personally cant stand push pull zooms, and have on occasion mistaken the dampening ring for the focus ring.

[Dallasphotog]

I have a very old EF300 F/4.0 LUSM without the stabilizer. I consider it a favorite becuase of its light weight and sharpness. It is a very, very useful for daylight sports.


I have only used the 100-400 once andit justwasn't fast enough or easy enough to use. I'm sure if i owned one, I'd learn to use the funky push-pull zoom, but it was akward for me.


I do see two or three100-400's on the sidelines at high school games, so it can certainly be used for sports, even at night.

[Brendan7]

I own the 300 f/4 IS, and love it. Absolutely no complaints about it. If you already have the 100-200mm range covered and don't shoot too much bird the 300 will give you a sharper, lighter, faster, closer-focusing and less expensive package than a 100-400. IMO it's the better lens for any situation. I picked it over the 100-400 and 400 f5.6 prime, and I suggest you to do the same. Feel free to ask any questions about my experience with it. Due to financial considerations it's currently my only lens, and I use it a lot. I couldn't feel better about my purchase of the 300.





brendan

[clemmb]

I currently have the opportunity to pick up a used but in like-new conditionEF 100-400mm for a fair bit less than the cost of a newEF 300mm f/4L.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

You can get a 100-400 in like-new condition for more than 21% less than a new one. Jump on it. If you do not like it you can sell it for a profit and then buy the 300.


Mark

[Daniel Browning]

We had a similar thread a while back:


Which lens? 100-400mm L IS or 300mm f4 L IS?


I think the 100-400 is better if you will take advantage of zoom and/or plan to use 400mm frequently.


I think the 300mm is better if you don't need zoom and/or don't plan to use it with 1.4X most of the time.


Generally, I think most people are better suited with the 100-400.

[Tony Printezis]

Hi there,


Well, the 200mm f/2.8 L is compatible with the 1.4x extender (according to Bryan's review), which would give you an almost 300m f/4. So, why don't you also consider the 400m 5.6 L? Yes, it doesn't have IS which can be a deal breaker... But if you're going to be shooting a lot at 400m, the prime should provide better IQ than the 100-400 or the 300 f4 + extender.


Tony

[Brendan7]

Hi there,


Well, the 200mm f/2.8 L is compatible with the 1.4x extender (according to Bryan's review), which would give you an almost 300m f/4. So, why don't you also consider the 400m 5.6 L? Yes, it doesn't have IS which can be a deal breaker... But if you're going to be shooting a lot at 400m, the prime should provide better IQ than the 100-400 or the 300 f4 + extender.

John said he's looking for a wildlife lens, plus a bird or two. The 400 prime is a BIF (bird in flight, for those who don't know) lens. It is often too long, too slow or limited by its 11' close focus. For bird only, it may be the best of the three, but for general wildlife, John would be better off with the 100-400 or 300. The 400 prime does have slightly better IQ than the 300 + 1.4 TC, but the IQ of that combination is still very good. And remember, the 420mm lens that will result WILL have IS. I could even argue that since he isn't shooting birds too much, he doesn't need 400mm. I shoot bird with my 300 and it does just fine.


Well, that's my opinion []


brendan

[Bill W]

John...I'm w/Mark (Clemmb), buy the 100-400, use it for a month and if you don't like it, sell itfor the same price or more.


I have the 100-400 and it's on my camera 80% of the time. I use it for landscapes to BIFs, but be warned; it frustrates me in low light (read overcast New England winter days) and it's bokeh is barely tolerable in a busy wooded bird shot.


But w/that said I can't complain, it's IQ is very good (obviously not upto a prime), and it's versatility can't be beat. As far as the push/pull zoom; I prefer it over the twist zooms....it's much faster.And don't be influenced by statements concerning dust...it's hogwash...in 2 years of ownership, I don't notice any dust spots in my pix, and if I did, that's what PS is for...right?


I said keep it for a month John, for there is a learning curve w/this lens.


Good luck


Bill

[Sheiky]

John,


if I were you I'd pick the 100-400 over the 300mm. I doubt that for your needs the 300mm is a big advantage over your 200mm. I had the 70-200 and a lot of times 200mm is really too short for wildlife. I doubt that 300mm would give me a big advantage in those shots. The option to go from 100-400 in a sec looks pretty great to me. Also with nature photography I assume you mean: long walks or hikes trough nature and shooting whatever ends up in front of you? Not sitting still waiting for subjects to enter your frame[:P]


In that case the versatility of the zoom is a feature you'll like a lot. You've got a very nice base with the 100 and 200mm. And I assume you've also got something like a 17-55 to do the wideangled shots? A 100-400 would complete your collection I think.


300mm will give you better IQ perhaps, but I don't know about that and I guess the 100-400 gives you good quality as well []


Good luck!


Jan