[*-)]I am having a great deal of trouble deciding between these two awesome lenses.


Both are essentially similar purpose ; both cost north of 4.5k although the 300 is somewhat less expensive; both have IS; both are equally heavy; both have amazing image quality; The 200 is relatively faster but the 300 has greater reach and is no slouch;


The 200 is better for low light but the 300 is not bad either.


Both receive A+ reviews from enthusiastic users.


Currently I have the ff lenses and perhaps this should help determine what I should add.


70-200/2.8L IS; 24-105/4L IS; Macro 100/2.8L IS


I am using the 5DMII body.


I will be using the lens for birds, flowers, landscape, non formal portraits, zoo, park, etc.


I know the 70-200/2.8 is similar in the focal length covered to the 200/2 , but the image quality of the 300/2 and the 200/2 is mind boggling.


Anyone with any input please; if you have used either or preferably both, your insight would be greatly appreciated by myself and I am sure others who find themselves in a similar situation.


Also, any input as to who may have a US warranty product with the real Canon lens case, would be greatly appreciated as well. Most of the vendors seem to have a replacement lens case and their own one year warranty instead of the Canon warranty.


TIA.