Which lens?

[Medic1]

Ok, heres the dilemma. I do mainly aviation photography (some landscape and nature as well). I am looking to get what will most likely be my final telephoto lens, as I really do not require anything further. These are the three options I have come down to:

100-400 L IS

or

300 f4L IS with a 1.4X TC

or

70-200 2.8 with a 2X TC

Heres the questions:

1. At these focal lengths, how beneficial will IS be to me, especially during panning? Assuming good lighting....
2. Is it worth getting the 70-200 2.8 when I already have the f4L?
3. I hear alot of talk about how long and difficult the 100-400 is when zoomed out, and how the push/pull zoom is a dust lover....any truth to these?

I am buying a 20D first but keeping my 300D. I thought with the prime, I could keep my 70-200 f4L (or shorter) on the 300D and put the 300 f4L on the 20D, thus eliminating alot of lens swapping at things such as airshows. I am still a little undecided as to how useful a 300mm prime will be on a regular basis. The only reason I contemplate the 70-200 2.8 is that with a 2X TC it will give me 140-400 (but no IS) So many thoughts running through my head!! LOL.

Any opinions are welcome.....especially from those of you who do airshows (and plane spotting) and other similar things such as auto racing.

I imagine the 300 prime is the sharpest of the bunch......any complaints about any of these?

[rg-tom]

if you already have a 70-200 F4 I'd personally grab the 300 F4 IS :)

[Jon]

1) IS will help, especially for prop jobs, since you won't want to use an appropriate hand-holding speed 'cuz it'll freeze the prop. IS will let you drop down to a more reasonable 1/250 or so, giving a bit of motion to the prop.
2) No. Not unless you mean to replace the 70-200 f/4 with the f/2.8. And you'll be disappointed with the effect of the 2x TC on the lens.
3) No truth to either.

Get the 100-400. No question. Especially for air shows and nature. Do you want to be swapping back and forth among the 70-200, 300,and 300 with TC, or taking pictures? Plus it's a really good lens. Someone (LongWatcher?) posted a comparison of the 100-400 and the 400 f/5.6 here, but I don't see it on a quick search.

[Medic1]

1) IS will help, especially for prop jobs, since you won't want to use an appropriate hand-holding speed 'cuz it'll freeze the prop. IS will let you drop down to a more reasonable 1/250 or so, giving a bit of motion to the prop.
2) No. Not unless you mean to replace the 70-200 f/4 with the f/2.8. And you'll be disappointed with the effect of the 2x TC on the lens.
3) No truth to either.

Get the 100-400. No question. Especially for air shows and nature. Do you want to be swapping back and forth among the 70-200, 300,and 300 with TC, or taking pictures? Plus it's a really good lens. Someone (LongWatcher?) posted a comparison of the 100-400 and the 400 f/5.6 here, but I don't see it on a quick search.

Well, I really won't have to swap lenses, just bodies. I will need out around 300mm for the long shots and runway landings, then switching to a 70-200 or shorter when they are taxiing.......

Thanks for the info....keep it coming!! I like to hear lots of opinions

[gasrocks]

I agree with rg-tom, get the 300 f/4 IS L. And, you don't have anything that is really wide. Get the 10-22 for the 20D.

[khiromu]

If I can assume that for aviation photography you will have lots of sun light, then how about 400/5.6? It focuses faster than 300/4 especially when you use focus limitter. Also it's light enough to carry around all day compare with 100-400IS or 70-200 + 1.4.

[raylks]

Get the 300mm f4. With the teleconverter, you get the flexibility of switching between 300mm and 420mm.

[Medic1]

Get the 300mm f4. With the teleconverter, you get the flexibility of switching between 300mm and 420mm.

I was thinking the same.......from what I have read the 300 f4L is still one of the sharpest primes even with the TC. Then I have an extra 20mm (not really anything to shout about, but hey its there...lol)

[raylks]

Get the 300mm prime. It is one of the sharpest among Canon lens line-up and it allows a potential to shoot in 420mm with AF using teleconverter.

In any case, if you have requirement on image quality, you shall avoid shooting with 2x teleconverter which degrades the image quality by around 20% unless you have no choice and reach is so important for you for a shot.

[Medic1]

Get the 300mm prime. It is one of the sharpest among Canon lens line-up and it allows a potential to shoot in 420mm with AF using teleconverter.

In any case, if you have requirement on image quality, you shall avoid shooting with 2x teleconverter which degrades the image quality by around 20% unless you have no choice and reach is so important for you for a shot.

420 should be enough reach for now (well, at least until my bank account recovers from the shock...lol). I don't want to degrade image quality at all....so, 420 it is!!

Thanks!!