FEChariot wrote in post #16807852
I think it's safe to say they are equal. They trade wins and losses at different lengths/apertures if you pixel peep but nothing you would notice in real life. Although if you try to compare the 70-300 at 300 versus the 70-200 @ 280 with a TC, the 70-300 will be noticably better
Interesting, thanks. I just went to the local camera store and held the f4. Best feeling lens I have ever used. Also tried out the Tamron 70-300 VC, 70-200 IS II, and the 100-400. My thought with the f2.8, for the $1,000 more than the f4, wouldn't it be better to move up to a 6d? That would more than make up for any speed increase in aperture since you can crank the ISO (assuming you have a significantly less high ISO capable body).
Also, the Tamron was really loud when focusing. VC worked phenomenal, felt like I could hold it steady at 300mm down to 1/x seconds (although have not looked at the images on the computer and my 5d LCD is terrible. I really want the 70-200, and would only ever consider a lens with IS in that focal range.