300mm F 4.0 or 400mm F 5.6 ?

[kc4sox]

Current stable includes:

5D MK3
24-105 L F4.0
70-200 L IS F 2.8


I'm looking to add a prime tele to the kit for sports ( Football / Soccer / Baseball / Softball )

I like the idea of the 300 because it's an F 4.0 but, the 400 5.6 gets great image reviews. As far as the added loss of light that comes with the 400 is concerned the high ISO image quality of my 5D MK3 should cover that nicely. My question for the group is, will the added 100 mm over my 70-200 be enough or would I better served with the 400 ?

Go...............

 

[tirediron]

I'd go for the 300; you can add a 1.4TC and be at the 400 and get double the use.

 

[sscarmack]

^^^

I'm with Tirediron here. 300 has been on my list since I started shooting. 2.8 of course.

 

[pdq5oh]

I have the 300 and like it a lot. IQ is very good. It also has IS, which the 400 doesn't.

 

[Didereaux]

If you are going to be shooting sports, or wildlife for that matter, why not the old reliable 100-400mm IS USM L? Just because it is not the latest (and therefor the faddies poh pooh it) does not mean it is not up to anything you want to do in those two area. The wife and I have looked at and tried several primes, and even the newer telles, but we cannot find any that do any better than aur two 'goto' lens. the 100-400, and the 24-105 IS USM L. we have a 2.0 extender. BTW if you slap an extender on anything you had better have a tri-pod handy, or a monopod. We shoot wildlife, and birds, occasionally a landscape, and sports. We interchange them on a 6d, and a 7D. If you are a serious photographer, amateur or pro you know the value is matching the lens to your style, and not how much money you can spend on the latest, greatest.

Here's some examples of each, certainly not all are good, but many are, and one or two are great.
Sports; Picasa Web Albums - monte - Action & Sports
Birds and wildlife: Picasa Web Albums - monte - Our Bird pics...
Odds and ends: Picasa Web Albums - monte - Drop Box
here's an architecture done with the 24-105:

Picasa Web Albums - monte
100-400mm handheld
Picasa Web Albums - monte

 

[JacaRanda]

I went with the 300f4 because I felt is was more versatile. The minimum focusing distance was a key factor in my choice. However, the 400 is a great lens for wildlife. It's lack of a short minimum focus distance is partially what makes it focus fast on things at a distance. It does really well with birds in flight.

I would go 300F4 because you do sports (hopefully you have a say in the distance you are from the action). If you did birding, I would say 400 especially since you have a FF camera.

 

[kc4sox]

Thanks guys, So far it looks like the 300 f 4.0 is the winner..................

 

[curtyoungblood]

I shoot a lot of high school sports with the 5diii. If you're shooting high school sports indoors or under the lights, there is no way you'll be able to get a reasonable exposure at 5.6.

I've also been trying to find the best way to get longer than 200 (and can't afford anything 2.8). We shoot a lot of gyms and fields that have nice light, but getting to f4 still requires pushing the ISO close to the max (usually 8,0000 or 12,800). Putting a converter on the 300 for daylight sports sounds like a great option.

 

[runnah]

How much money do you have?

The new 400mm f/4 look amazing! $7k tho so is out of most people's budget.

Also why not the tamron? The makr 3 should make the higher fstops not that big of an issue.

 

[Rick50]

I have the 300, F4.0 and it is an excellent lens. With IS I can hand carry to the zoo and it works great.
I have used a 1.4 and 2.0 tele with it but that is on a tripod.