70-200 f/2.8 or 300 f/4

Should i go for the canon 70-200L f/2.8 non is + 1.4 convertor

or the 300 L f/4

will mainly use the lens for walk about wildlife and nature

thanks all

Will you be needing to shoot at the 70mm or 100mm range? If you strictly need the 300mm range, get the prime. It will be cheaper, lighter and sharper.

I much prefer the 70-200, since you never know how close/far the objects gonna be....especially with animals. Sometimes, you just can't walk away for zoom out. If you are going for the 70-200, get an extender to go with it, then you have almost 300mm in range.

jingler wrote in post #12638093
Should i go for the canon 70-200L f/2.8 non is + 1.4 convertor

or the 300 L f/4

will mainly use the lens for walk about wildlife and nature

thanks all

Here's the problem ... for walkabout wildlife and walkabout nature, the answer is different. 300 for wildlife, 70-200 for nature. Your brief explanation of what you're looking to shoot suggests that if you get the 300 you will be sorry you sacrificed the flexibility of the 70-200.

I use the 300L w/1.4xII on outdoor sports/wildlife while the 70-200 2.8 as my walk around lens and indoor sports/activities. Good luck on your choices. Both lens are excellent.

thanks for your comments
i am moving towards the 70-200 + convertor set up as it appears to be more versatile

most of the comments on other posts only seem to talk about the IS version of the 70-200 what are your opinions on the non IS lens

the difference is a couple of $$'s...a sturdy monopod/tripod will do the job.

If you are walking around shooting wildlife, go with the 300 all the way. I found my 70-200 always too short, and even my 300 feels to short sometimes but the extenders help. The 70-200 with extenders really requires you to stop down 1-2 additional stops to get good sharpness and contrast. Autofocus suffers quite a bit as well.

Only place I ever had to "back away" from wildlife to get the shot with the 300 was in the Galapagos Islands but I think that may be a rare exception

I have a Tokina 80-400 that I used very effectively for nature photography when I was more into that. Great lens, and decent price, though it's not image stabilized and best stopped down a little. Just another option.