100-400 or a 300 f:4L for traveling

[me21664875854]

I have been reading all the responses to the questions regarding the various zoom lenses. I do a lot of traveling and I would like to expand my lens selection. I have an Elan, with 2 other lenses, and a 1.4 teleconverter. I was considering the 100-400 or the fixed 300 f:4L. Many of you seem very knowledgeable, so I'd like your opinions on this. I's mainly looking for a lens for nature or wildlife pictures. I also narrowed it down to these 2 lenses, so from these 2 what would you recommend. Thanks

[jeff_nakayama]

100-400 for its IS and versitility.

[lee2]

I do not own either of these lenses but since you have narrowed the

selection down to these two only, I would pick the 100-400mm. For

travel, a zoom will always be more versatile than a fixed focal

length.

[derrick_morin___fallon__ne]

The 300 f/4L will produce sharper images and may serve you better for

your wildlife shots IF your other lenses will compensate for its lack

of virsitility. Consider the whole package - will the zoom be

redundant? If not, that may be your best bet. But if you already

have lenses that cover part of that focal range, I would strongly

consider the straight 300. Of course, you may not want to lug it

around (I don't know how big it is compared to the 100-400).

[me21664875854]

Thanks for your help. I figured out I'm going to sell my 75-300mm

canon lense and replace it with the 100-400. Thanks :)

[isaac sibson]

Well...

 

<p>

 

I've got the 300 F4L IS, and the 1.4X TC, as well as the 70-200 F4L.

I could replace ALL of this with just the 100-400, but at the cost

of image quality.

 

<p>

 

I think, for travel, the 100-400 is a good choice. I travel with my

kit, and it can be a pain (especially as I'm too young to be able to

rent a car).

 

<p>

 

A good travel combo would be 28-105 and 100-400, with a Canon 1.4X

TC as well if you have an EOS 3 or 1V or 1D, or don't mind manual-

focus. This gives you a lot of range for not many lenses. Problem is

that going wider is useful also.

 

<p>

 

My kit comprises of 24-85 USM, 70-200 F4L USM and 300 F4L IS USM

lenses, with the 1.4X TC. Once I get my EOS 3, I will get a 2X TC

also. This makes a good travel kit, not really missing any part of

the range, and offering good image quality, but is heavier and less

convenient as the kit mentioned about.

 

<p>

 

I'd say, despite owning the 300 F4L IS, that the 100-400 is the

better travel lens.

[andrew_hardacre2]

I have both lenses and have travelled quite a lot with each of them

but never both. The 100-400 is of course more versatile but I find

the quality of the 300 f4 IS is much better and I always regret not

taking it. I also take the 1.4x converter. My other lenses on

travel always include a f2.8 wide angle and the 28-135 IS. Personally

I find the 100-400 tends to 'soft' images with very close up shots

whereas the f4 prime is sharp from every aspect. The 300mm f4 is

great for bird flight shots.

[wildlight photographer]

I went through similar angst six months ago when I was debating

whether to purchase the 300 f4 IS, 400 f5.6 and the 100-400. I opted

for the 100-400, and am very glad that I did. The reason is length,

versatility and image stabilization. I've taken some absolutely

stunning bird images since acquiring this lens along with the EOS 3

w/PB-2 booster, the most recent being at Bosque del Apache this past

weekend. I was with a friend who in addition to having the 100-400

uses the new 500 f4 IS. We both commented what a wonderful lens the

100-400 is.

 

<p>

 

Happy hunting!

[andrew2]

If I'm travelling, I'd avoid my 100-400L and pick up a couple of light primes. I typically carry my 200/2.8, 85/1.8 and 35/2.