Upgrading a 70-300

[mark_davis16]

<p>I currently own a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM that I would like to upgrade while the Canon rebates are in effect. The lens would split time with my 24-105 for most of my photography (landscape/nature/portraits), but also needs to complement the other lenses in my bag:<br>

EF 50mm f/1.4 USM<br>

EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM<br>

EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM<br>

EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM<br>

I am undecided between the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L, EF 70-200 f/4L IS and the EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS.<br>

What would be the best fit with the above lenses? Thoughts or suggestions?<br>

Thanks!<br>

-Mark</p>

[joseph_dickerson]

<p>Do you use your current 70-300 at the long end much. If yes, then go for the 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS. It's a great lens. <br>

If your answer was no, then the 70-200 f/4L IS would make sense. Unless of course you absolutely need the f/2.8 aperture.<br>

Any of the lenses you're looking at will blow your current 70-300 totally out of the water.<br>

JD</p>

[ed_k__north_carolina_]

<p>First, set your current zoom to 200mm, look thru the viewfinder and zoom out to 300mm. If that makes a big difference to you, then your decision just got harder.</p>

<p>For me, it is not much of a difference. If you can't get the shot at 200mm, the likelihood you will get it at 300mm is slim.</p>

<p>For me the 70-200 IS f2.8L is a great lens, not merely a good one, and is one of the finest lenses I have every used. I have used it with a Canon 2X and the results were amazing.</p>

<p>Ed</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>As the others have said, if you need 300mm, obviously get the 70-300 L. And if you think you need more than 300m, the new 100-400 L would fit the bill. Otherwise, get the 70-200/4 L IS. It's a terrific lens </p>

[geoffm]

<p>I have the lenses you have (with the exception of the 50/1.4). I also have the 100-400, which I quite like. With just three lenses I can go from 10mm to 400mm. I have hung onto the 70-300 for travelling, where weight matters. The 70-300 ain't too bad a lens, and it beats the others in reach per gram! </p>

[mark_davis16]

<p>Thanks for the comments and advice...it was helpful in making the decision...the 70-200/4 L IS.</p>