Personal Choice to make...

[klotzishere20]

I have to choose between a new 300mm canon 2. is and a used 400mm non-is... the 400 is in very good shape

iso: opinions!!!

edit: used for close wildlife shooting and possibly sports.

 

[usayit]

which 400mm? There are at least three of them.
which 300mm? There are at least two versions.

What type of wildlife?
What type of sports? Indoor? Outdoor?

 

[klotzishere20]

which 400mm? There are at least three of them.
which 300mm? There are at least two versions.

What type of wildlife?
What type of sports? Indoor? Outdoor?

Canon EF 300mm 2.8 L IS USM Lens
400mm L f/2.8 non IS mkI

Wildlife - smaller birds to bigger mammals (avid hunter I can get pretty close)
Sports - Mostly outdoor, but probably some highschool games - which means at night.

 

[uplander]

The 400....get a 1.4 and a 2x TC also for birds.
The 300 might be better for sports as sometime you can't get back far enough.

I still would opt for the 400 tho.

 

[klotzishere20]

The 400....get a 1.4 and a 2x TC also for birds.
The 300 might be better for sports as sometime you can't get back far enough.

I still would opt for the 400 tho.

any more opinions? remember the 400 is not an IS

 

[uplander]

IS is not something good technique can't overcome.

IS will get you the shot maybe 10% of the time.

The 300 is crazy sharp and If you just wanted to do sports you could make it work. Throw wildlife into the mix and 300 is just too short, Hell even 400 is short. What's nice is the 400 with a 1.4 TC shows next to no degradation.


The more I think of it ...You should go the 400 mover the 300.

 

[Groupcaptainbonzo]

The 300mm is a bit short for wild life . A 500 or 600 is better (But more expensive). As mentioned the 400 plus a 1.4 extender would be worth it as it would give you an affectiv 560mm f4. With a REALLY good tri-pod that could be usable. If you are using an APS C sensor the equivilent would be about a 900mm f4. Now you would be cooking ! !.
I would fight shy of the 2X teleconverter thoughas althou the idea of a 1280mm would be inviting, the lens would only work at the equivelent of f 5.6, and you would start to loose quality in large prints.