EF 100-400mm Or EF 300mm f/4

[photogeek72]

Hello forum,
I am debating between two lenses:

Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
or
Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM

My main target is wildlife photography. Mostly birds and other fast moving animals. What are your recommendations or suggestions? If you could pick one, which one would you get?

If you are familiar with another lens that may be better and at the same price range (less than $1600) Please enlighten me with your wisdom!

Other info that may be useful: I have a Canon 7D with with a EF 70-300mm f/4.5 lens.

I'm leaning toward getting the EF 300 because it seems to be faster than the 100-400. However, i would also plan on using a 1.4 extender. Would this slow the lens down?

Looking forward to your comments and suggestions!

[RichardTaylor]

See this thread on another forum.

100-400 vs 300 with 1.4 [Page 1]: Canon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

I went with the 100-400 because I like the flexibility of a zoom.
I also have to 70-300 IS for when I want to travel light.
I have no regrets.

[OsmosisStudios]

Adding the 1.4 TC onto the end makes it a 420 f5.6 lens. A 1.4 TC robs 1 stop of light, a 1.7 TC robs 1.5 stops and a 2.0 TC is 2 stops.

[inkista]

Originally Posted by photogeek72

My main target is wildlife photography. Mostly birds and other fast moving animals. What are your recommendations or suggestions? If you could pick one, which one would you get?

100-400L, because I also like shooting at the zoo. But what I have is the EF 400mm f/5.6L USM, because I love getting bird in flight shots, and it was considerably cheaper than the 100-400L.

I'm leaning toward getting the EF 300 because it seems to be faster than the 100-400. However, i would also plan on using a 1.4 extender. Would this slow the lens down?

Yes. You lose a stop of max. aperture, and the AF speed will probably also slow a bit. Although with the 300 f/4L USM, it's likely to still give you acceptable performance. The 2x tc is probably not usable with AF unless you tape over the pins, and the AF performance is likely to get even wonkier, because of the max. aperture issue (most dSLR bodies stop autofocusing when the max. aperture of the lens hits f/8).

I occasionally use a Kenko non-reporting 1.4x tc with my 400/5.6L. My experience is, if what you really want is a 400mm lens, get a 400mm lens. Adding a tc to a 300mm lens is not the same thing. If you plan to use the 300L as a 300mm lens the majority of the time and add a tc occasionally, then it's the right lens to get. But if you plan to use a tc with it all the time, just suck it up and get the longer lens.

[gturner]

300 F4 will give you a great image, but the 100-400 will give you nearly as good IQ with MUCH more versatility. The reach to 400 is significant.

[JAHphoto]

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM Lens - Canon EF 300mm f/4.0 L IS USM Lens Comparison - ISO 12233 Resolution Chart Results
if you take a look there, you can compare the two lenses (setting the focal length of the 300 to 420 gives you what it looks like with the 1.4)
as you can see, you get a slightly softer center with the 300+1.4, but less light falloff, and sharper corners with less distortion (not surprising for a prime vs zoom).
And with out the 1.4, comparing the two lenses at 300, the prime beats the zoom hands down. Sharper all around, especially in the corners.

Also, keep in mind, Canon just announced new TCs, which means that image quality with a 1.4 will be even better.

So, if you want really good image quality, go for the 300. But the 100-400 still delivers great quality pictures, and is much more flexible. Personally, I think there are times you just need the flexibility of a zoom. I usually shoot with both a zoom and a prime telephoto so I can get my high quality photos when the subject is in the right spot, but still be able to capture it when it's too close for my fixed. (last time I really needed that setup was an airshow)

For what you're doing, the zoom is probably best, unless you require extremely high quality images.

[photogeek72]

Thank you all for your recommendations and suggestions. I think the best way to figure out what lens is best for me is to actually use them. So will go ahead and rent both when i have a chance.

Again, thank you all for your recommendations and ideas.

[photogeek72]

i just found out about the Canon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM. I know it is substantially more expensive than the other 100-400 or the 300. What do you all think? any experience with it?

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by photogeek72

i just found out about the Canon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM. I know it is substantially more expensive than the other 100-400 or the 300. What do you all think? any experience with it?

The paparazzi bazooka. Fun stuff.

It wont deliver the same image quality, at all, to the other options. It's a superzoom, not a prioritized telephoto zoom or, better yet, telephoto prime.