Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6L IS USM or Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L USM?? 100mm diff...

Started Apr 11, 2012 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
bronxbombers Forum Pro • Posts: 18,226
Re: Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6L IS USM or Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L USM?? 100mm diff...

replicat0r wrote:

hmm.. That last review is quite helpful!! thanks

I am leaning towards the 70-300mm instead of the 100-400 or the 70-200 as of now

the 400 obviously have alot more reach but its also double the weight, i it 1380g vs the 630g of 300mm.

this lens is just a investment, it wont be used exclusively for wild life. I like to travel around and with my t2i(maybe ill upgrade it eventually) I also have a 10-22mm sigma and a 18-135mm(might replace this too) + a tripod, I felt that it was quite heavy as it is after carrying it for more then a couple of hours.

My question is how much does diff does 100mm make at the far end of the lens?

It definitely makes a difference.

That said, the 70-300 IS L is a nicer general purpose run around travel lens. Much smaller and somewhat lighter and if you ever go FF, 70mm is just wide enough to make it usable as a long-walk around.

For a general travel, general photo lens I like the 70-300L (size, weight, AF, more advanced IS, wider, a bit better image quality perhaps) although for a 100% pure wildlife lens the 100-400L is probably better though.

That should be a pretty awesome time there!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow