60D / Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM - is this a good idea?

so im thinking about upgrading from a 40D. I like going to zoos since i cant go on safaris. So im thinking a 60D ( good prices recently ) with the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM, this would be my dedicated zoo setup? Good match?

windoze

I love mine for wildlife, its also the perfect zoo lens as it has a great focal range and a light package so it doesn't burden you as you walk around. Bonus for you with a crop sensor, you get even more reach out of it than I do, and I didn't find myself wanting for anything longer at the zoo.

All from the TO Zoo

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/78434343@N05/8​236944528/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/78434343@N05/8​163896349/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/78434343@N05/8​236945240/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/78434343@N05/8​167262058/

I'd say save your money and buy a 1.4x converter for your 70-200mm lens. I bet they'd have very comparable IQ.

Its a good match but unless you do not like the bulk of the 70-200 I too say just get a 1.4 or a 2x III.

HaroldC3 wrote in post #15453403
I'd say save your money and buy a 1.4x converter for your 70-200mm lens. I bet they'd have very comparable IQ.

hmmm, i didnt think of that, you dont think theres image quality loss due to the extender??

windoze wrote in post #15453468
hmmm, i didnt think of that, you dont think theres image quality loss due to the extender??

There is always a degree of image loss with an extender. But seeing as you already have a 70-200 its a quick cheap way of getting more reach. The IQ on the 70-300L will be better as it is natively very sharp wide open even at 300. If you want 300 or above, there is always the 300mm f/4 prime or the 400 f/5.6 prime

I bought my 70-200 AFTER I already had a 100-400L. If I had the 70-200 first, I would have skipped the long zoom and gone with the 400 f/5.6L. Or, with a 60D you may want to try the 70-200 and cropping. The 60D has a few more MP than the 40D.

Christina.DazzleByDesi​gn wrote in post #15453500
There is always a degree of image loss with an extender. But seeing as you already have a 70-200 its a quick cheap way of getting more reach. The IQ on the 70-300L will be better as it is natively very sharp wide open even at 300. If you want 300 or above, there is always the 300mm f/4 prime or the 400 f/5.6 prime

my thinking was that the 70-300 is approx a lb less in weight than the 70-200 ( so its easier to hand hold ) and it being sharper wide open at 300 than the 70-200 with extender would result in more sharper images..... and for me thats what's its all about - sharp images. i dont like switiching lenses. i feel the 70-200 on the 60D is not enough reach and the 400 on the 60D is too restrictive, so the 60D with 70-300 if indeed has good IQ then seems to fit the bill.


windoze

windoze wrote in post #15453523
my thinking was that the 70-300 is approx a lb less in weight than the 70-200 ( so its easier to hand hold ) and it being sharper wide open at 300 than the 70-200 with extender would result in more sharper images..... and for me thats what's its all about - sharp images. i dont like switiching lenses. i feel the 70-200 on the 60D is not enough reach and the 400 on the 60D is too restrictive, so the 60D with 70-300 if indeed has good IQ then seems to fit the bill.


windoze

Exactly my reasoning when I sold my 70-200 2.8 II and got this lens