100-400mm or 28-300mm?

Curt Wells · 6th of February 2006 (Mon)

I have a 20D with a 24-70mm L and am considering a telephoto zoom for mostly outdoor and wildlife. I'm thinking about the 100-400mm L or the 28-300mm L and need a push. With the 1.6 multiplier these are essentially 160-640mm and 45-480mm lenses. Will the 160mm low end be too long at times? And, would the newer, more expensive lens be worth the extra money and be long enough?

Any advice? Thanks.

LightRules · 6th of February 2006 (Mon)

Mostly outdoors and wildlife? Easy: 100400IS.

Skip Souza · 6th of February 2006 (Mon)

The 28-300 l is a better PJ lens. Go for the 100-400 L all the way.

fWord · 6th of February 2006 (Mon)

Though I lack the experience, it might be safe to say that you need all the reach you can get when you're dealing with wildlife. The 1.6X crop factor extends the reach of either lens significantly, but I'd still go for the 100-400mm, even if I had enough dough to get either.

The 28-300mm strikes me as a lens that's walkabout in terms of range, but certainly not in terms of weight.

Since you already have the 24-70mm to cover wider shots, it might seem to be a bit of an overlap if you got the 28-300mm lens.

jj1987 · 6th of February 2006 (Mon)

hrm if you have used the 100-400 you wouldnt even have to ask. 100-400!!!

chancellor · 6th of February 2006 (Mon)

Curt Wells, I'm a person who has a 28-300L curse (keep buying and selling the damn thing). In this context I definitely agree that you need 100-400L. Someone may throw a friendly "poison-pill" by mentioning Bigma, but given the choice your bet is 100-400L.

lon10c · 6th of February 2006 (Mon)

Third the 100-400.

Andy_T · 7th of February 2006 (Tue)

Of course, the Sigma 300-800 would give you even more reach

Best regards,
Andy

nitsch · 7th of February 2006 (Tue)

I find wildlife needs at least 400mm (even with the 1.6x crop factor), so on that basis I would recommend the 100-400, it's a cracking lens and the focal length will go nicely with your 24-70.

Curt Wells · 7th of February 2006 (Tue)

Thanks guys, it sounds like my mind is made up for me. I kind of expected such replies. The 100-400mm seems quite popular. Take care.

6th of February 2006 (Mon)	#1
Curt Wells Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 26	100-400mm or 28-300mm? I have a 20D with a 24-70mm L and am considering a telephoto zoom for mostly outdoor and wildlife. I'm thinking about the 100-400mm L or the 28-300mm L and need a push. With the 1.6 multiplier these are essentially 160-640mm and 45-480mm lenses. Will the 160mm low end be too long at times? And, would the newer, more expensive lens be worth the extra money and be long enough? Any advice? Thanks.

6th of February 2006 (Mon)	#2
LightRules "flat out embarrassing" Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 9,895	Re: 100-400mm or 28-300mm? Mostly outdoors and wildlife? Easy: 100400IS.

6th of February 2006 (Mon)	#3
Skip Souza Moderator Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: The Left Coast in the Land of Fruits and Nuts Posts: 24,102 IMAGE EDITING OK	Re: 100-400mm or 28-300mm? The 28-300 l is a better PJ lens. Go for the 100-400 L all the way. __________________ Canon Pro1 and Colt .380 are always with me. If you don't have it when you need it, you can't shoot it. That which does not kill me ~~ Should Run. كافر‎ 5DMkII, 7D, 70-300L IS, 24-105L, 100-400L *"PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED."* For Sale: ASUS Netbook

6th of February 2006 (Mon)	#4
fWord Goldmember Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,635 IMAGE EDITING OK	Re: 100-400mm or 28-300mm? Though I lack the experience, it might be safe to say that you need all the reach you can get when you're dealing with wildlife. The 1.6X crop factor extends the reach of either lens significantly, but I'd still go for the 100-400mm, even if I had enough dough to get either. The 28-300mm strikes me as a lens that's walkabout in terms of range, but certainly not in terms of weight. Since you already have the 24-70mm to cover wider shots, it might seem to be a bit of an overlap if you got the 28-300mm lens. __________________ LightWorks Portfolio Night Photography Tutorial: Basics & Minutiae Gear List (Past & Present) The Art of Composition IS the Art of Photography.

6th of February 2006 (Mon)	#5
jj1987 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 1,398 IMAGE EDITING OK	Re: 100-400mm or 28-300mm? hrm if you have used the 100-400 you wouldnt even have to ask. 100-400!!!

6th of February 2006 (Mon)	#6
chancellor Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Alpharetta Posts: 1,009	Re: 100-400mm or 28-300mm? Curt Wells, I'm a person who has a 28-300L curse (keep buying and selling the damn thing). In this context I definitely agree that you need 100-400L. Someone may throw a friendly "poison-pill" by mentioning Bigma, but given the choice your bet is 100-400L. __________________ 5D Mk II\|1N\|28-300L\|35L\|85L II\|

6th of February 2006 (Mon)	#7
lon10c Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: St. John, USVI Posts: 374	Re: 100-400mm or 28-300mm? Third the 100-400.

7th of February 2006 (Tue)	#8
Andy_T Compensating for his small ... sensor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Stuttgart/Cologne, Germany Posts: 9,848 IMAGE EDITING OK	Re: 100-400mm or 28-300mm? Of course, the Sigma 300-800 would give you even more reach Best regards, Andy __________________ some cameras, some lenses, and still a lot of things to learn... (so post processing examples on my images are welcome ) If you like the forum, vote for it where it really counts! CLICK here for the EOS FAQ CLICK here for the Post Processing FAQ CLICK here to understand a bit more about BOKEH

7th of February 2006 (Tue)	#9
nitsch Goldmember Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 2,393	Re: 100-400mm or 28-300mm? I find wildlife needs at least 400mm (even with the 1.6x crop factor), so on that basis I would recommend the 100-400, it's a cracking lens and the focal length will go nicely with your 24-70.

7th of February 2006 (Tue)	#10
Curt Wells Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 26	Re: 100-400mm or 28-300mm? Thanks guys, it sounds like my mind is made up for me. I kind of expected such replies. The 100-400mm seems quite popular. Take care.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
400mm? 300mm? 100-400mm? 50-500mm? Can't choose!!!	RbrtPtikLeoSeny	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	42	5th of November 2009 (Thu) 13:41
Comparison of EF 300mm f2.8 and EF 100-400mm	TSKFin	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	24	28th of February 2006 (Tue) 23:18
300mm f/4L + 1.4X TC or 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L?	fWord	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	32	23rd of January 2006 (Mon) 19:41
100-400mm f5.6L [at 100-300mm range]	prsast	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	12	20th of November 2004 (Sat) 01:40
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS VS. EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS	Csst	Canon EF and EF-S Lenses	11	3rd of May 2004 (Mon) 03:42