70-300L change of mind

rebel99 wrote:

kevindar wrote:

yes, the 70-300L is indeed very good. However, unless you are using your lens as a weapon, its highly unusual for 70-300 Non L to last you for only one year..... twice.

Its interesting what you say about focus breathing. Fist I have heard about it on this lens. I just tested it, and you are absolutely correct. its only about 10-20mm longer than 70-200 f4 IS at MFD.

this is usefule information for me, as I often shoot hummingbirds with it at very close distance. the 70-200 f4 IS is a stop faster, and lighter.

kevindar, unfortunately i lost my 70-200 f4.0IS a couple weeks ago and i need to replace it. i am really hesitant to purchase a new f4.0IS and replace the lost one or get 70-300 L IS, which has a superb IQ, almost the same as f4.0IS. in the same time, i do have a 70-200 f2.8L non-IS. i strongly feel like going for the 70-300 L which is nice for travels since i do have the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS already, what would you do? appreciate your input

chears.

You logic is sound.  optically, there is nothing that separates the two lenses.  both are stellar. 300 goes to 300, but its not a constant aperture.  its fatter and heavier and extends, but packs smaller.  Both are very fast focusing, with a very slight edge to the 70-200 f4 IS.  the 70-200 is also a touch less expensive.  However, If I were in your shoes, I would go with te 70-300 L IS.