300mm F/4L IS vs 100-400mm F/4.5-5.6L IS for bird photos - HELP!

n/t

Gus Stangeland said:

Daniella said:

ok let me get that straight? what's the point of buying a 300mm F4
lens if one is going to stuck a tc on it all the time?

Click to expand...

But on the other hand, what's the downside? My Canon 1.4x II
matches my 300f4 IS lens perfectly. Only another Canon person would
even know it's on there.

Click to expand...

this has nothing to do with easthetic I could not care less if I had a white lens with a black TC and a silver camera.. hey wait a minute..I do

it's not about the way the lens look, it's more about the way the images look.

It all looks just like one lens. Yes, it

Gus Stangeland said:

drops the aperture to 5.6, so it's a 420mm 5.6L IS lens for $1,095!
What's wrong with that?

Click to expand...

nothing wrong with that as long as you are happy with the image quality of it.

And I already have the Canon 1.4x TC, so

Gus Stangeland said:

that doesn't enter in to the equation.To go up in fl from there
would be a mammoth increase in price.

Once I get my focus problem corrected I'll be able to make some
comparisons. But for now, trying to compare IQ with OOF shots is an
excersize in futility. (I was going to say like "........ in the
wind") but thought not, ha!

Have a GREAT Thanksgiving all! I really appreciate discussions like
this. I have learned more from DPR than anywhere else.

Gotta run, turkey is being served at my daughter's house.

Gus

Click to expand...

--



http://www.pbase.com/zylen

I was just showing OP what he should expect from the lens not to compare image quality.

Here are a couple 100% crops from 300/4 + 1.4TC shot hand held wide open, converted from raw with no additional sharpening.

I owned both lenses that you tested at the same time at one point. I would have to say that my 300 f4 with tc was slightly better than the 100-400. I also have to say that both were more than sharp enough. Here is what I mean. If your goal or purpose in photography is to post 100% crops on the internet than the only option is the 400 2.8 for ultimate sharpness in that focal lenght. If your goal is to capture memories, print some pics and share some pictures online than both lenses will be plenty sharp. The reason I chose to keep the 300 f4 IS is because I enjoy the handling of it. I find the weight and balance to be perfect for me. One other factor is that I use a second body that usually has a 70-200 2.8 IS on it. All this being said I am looking at buying a 300 2.8 in the spring. The only thing holding me back is the weight and bulk. I am not sure I would enjoy carrying it around and travelling with it as much as the 300 f4. I try to keep photography enjoyable since it is after all a "hobby". Here are 3 pages from a book of our tripo to Africa that I recently put together for friends and family as well as a few people we met on the trip. The amazing thing is that out of everybody that saw these pictures, nobody (yes, zero) made a comment on the sharpness of the images.







All these pics were taken with the 300 f4with 1.4tc. I will not post 100% crops since that is not how I measure the quality of my lenses and there is no need for anyone to chime in telling me that is the only way to see the sharpness of a lens cos' you know what "I don't care( I mean that in the nicest way). What I have found is that there a lot of factors other than the sharpness of the lens that affect the final quality of the image.

I would suggest that you follow your own advice as mentioned earlier and test with the new body. The bottom line is that I don't think you can go wrong with either. Hey, let's face it. This combo is just the predecessor to your next purchase in the update and upgrade path
--
Richard300

No one can accuse you used the wrong lens. Not even the resident 300/4 basher.