moving from 70-300 (non-L) to ???

When I bought my 40D at the end of 2009, it came with the EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 zoom lens. I have enjoyed this lens, but I feel like I am ready for an upgrade. I've been very interested in the EF 100-400L for the past few years, but it seems to me that it is becoming an old lens as it has not been updated in years. So now I'm in a quandary: do I still go for the 100-400, or do I go for something a little more up-to-date. From everything I have read, the 100-440L is an excellent lens. There would be no sense in going to the new 700-300L unless the IQ is much better. The down size is I wouldn't get the extra 100mm reach. Is there another lens you think I should consider.

Thanks for your input.
Jim

a_roadbiker wrote in post #14725633
When I bought my 40D at the end of 2009, it came with the EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 zoom lens. I have enjoyed this lens, but I feel like I am ready for an upgrade. I've been very interested in the EF 100-400L for the past few years, but it seems to me that it is becoming an old lens as it has not been updated in years. So now I'm in a quandary: do I still go for the 100-400, or do I go for something a little more up-to-date. From everything I have read, the 100-440L is an excellent lens. There would be no sense in going to the new 700-300L unless the IQ is much better. The down size is I wouldn't get the extra 100mm reach. Is there another lens you think I should consider.

Thanks for your input.
Jim

The 70-300 L is a fabulous lens. I love mine. If you need the extra 100mm than the 100-400 is still a great lens, but if you are happy with your current range and reach, I think the 70-300 L is worth the extra beans. Great IQ, fast focus, sharp wide open @300mm, built like a tank, compact when stored (compared to the 100-400 for sure), great IS (compared to the older IS in the 100-400). All around a wonderful lens, and easy to travel with. But, if you want the extra range, and can put up with the push-pull design (I couldn't, but plenty are fine with it), and don't mind the extra size, the 100-400mm certainly isn't a bad choice.

The 70-300L is worlds better than the 70-300. A few shots, all SoOC, wide open:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/61744772@N06/7​576296048/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/61744772@N06/7​584136810/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/61744772@N06/7​584135162/

a_roadbiker wrote in post #14725633
When I bought my 40D at the end of 2009, it came with the EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 zoom lens. I have enjoyed this lens, but I feel like I am ready for an upgrade. I've been very interested in the EF 100-400L for the past few years, but it seems to me that it is becoming an old lens as it has not been updated in years. So now I'm in a quandary: do I still go for the 100-400, or do I go for something a little more up-to-date. From everything I have read, the 100-440L is an excellent lens. There would be no sense in going to the new 700-300L unless the IQ is much better. The down size is I wouldn't get the extra 100mm reach. Is there another lens you think I should consider.

Thanks for your input.
Jim

it depends on whether you need 400mm. If you think (or want) 400mm get the 100-400, otherwise the 70-300 will suffice.

XSi (450D)
Canon 100-400 L
400mm
(cropped)