OK gang, I'm in the mood of finally getting that long coveted L lens. Now, I am mainly operating with the EF 28-135 USM IS lens I got a year ago or so and I'm very pleased with it. I also own a Sigma 400 APO in Canon EF mount but unfortunately that lens works only with my EOS A2 (film) and Sigma does not offer a firmware which will enable it to work with the 5D I mean, I can still use it only at 5.6, which is ok on a tripod and daylight. But it bugs me that I can't really use it at any other f stops. Now, over the summer, I met with another talented forum member, Brent McWirther in Jackson Hole, WY. He was using a 100-400 L IS USM Canon lens which was sweet. I liked the minimum focusing distance, as it was heck of a lot shorter than my 400mm Sigma! And the fact that one can be in between 100 and 400, according to one's needs. I was sold on the 100-400... That is until now, when I read a few reviews, deeming it a bit too soft for any enlargements over 8x10. Hmm... Would I be better off with a 300/4 L lens? Since I am pretty new at digital, I thought of asking you guys and girls what your preferences are and why. Help me make up my mind. So you know what I'm after: A Canon L lens that will allow me to get closer to the wild life, be very sharp overall, offer a true color rendition, have the IS (I'm old and decrepit and I shake with anticipation before the shot...) Thanks y'all for your input.