C 70-200 f/4L IS vs EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS

Just looking for a lens with a bit more reach that what I currently own, and I set my mind on these two. I couldn't find any straight comparison between these two lenses, and I am particulary interested in differences in IQ and sharpness throughout the focal lenght. I am leaning towards 70-200 + TC for the extra reach, but only if this combination would equal or outperform 70-300 in IQ&sharpness. I will choose the one, that performs better then the other at longer end, as I intend to use it mostly for some basic "wildlife". I would appreciate any comments from users that have some hands on experience with any of these two or ideally both lenses.

Check out this thread. I've been very happy with my 70-300L. I didn't care for the 70-200 f/4.

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1218127

I have the 70-200 f4 IS with TC, and have rented the 70-300L.

I love my 70-200; it's small and light, gives wonderful IQ and has lightning fast focus. I tented the 70-300 L for a sports event; while my 70-200 does a good job, it's sometimes a bit short. I was prepared not to like the 70-300 because I love the 70-200 so much - but in fact I was blown away by it. It's a wonderful lens in every respect, and does a much better job than a 70-200 with a TC.

If I could bring myself to sell my 70-200, I'd buy the 70-300L in a heartbeat and if I was starting from scratch today, I'd buy the 70-300L.

Mag-1981 wrote in post #15982828
Just looking for a lens with a bit more reach that what I currently own, and I set my mind on these two. I couldn't find any straight comparison between these two lenses, and I am particulary interested in differences in IQ and sharpness throughout the focal lenght. I am leaning towards 70-200 + TC for the extra reach, but only if this combination would equal or outperform 70-300 in IQ&sharpness. I will choose the one, that performs better then the other at longer end, as I intend to use it mostly for some basic "wildlife". I would appreciate any comments from users that have some hands on experience with any of these two or ideally both lenses.

it won't. I just upgraded from the f4 IS to the 70-300L. and without TC the two lenses are very very close in IQ. there are many reviews on the net comparing the two, and I have no regrets.

You realize that at 300 mm it is a 5.6...

If you plan on shooting at ~300mm, the 70-300L at 300mm will be better than the 70-200L + TC at 280mm.

As far as comparing the IQ of the two lenses by themselves, it's really a tossup; some might say one lens is better than the other at a certain focal length, but I think you have a hard time telling the difference.

The 70-300L advantages are 300mm (obviously), shorter when packed away due to telescoping design. The 70-200L advantages are lighter, a stop faster at it's long end. I used to have the 70-200L, traded for the 70-300L, and I don't regret the decision - but wish I had the budget to have both.

[QUOTE=MakisM1;1598372​4]You realize that at 300 mm it is a 5.6...[/quote]

so is the f4 IS.

"You realize that at 300 mm it is a 5.6..."

Well, yeah...but I think I could live with that. Thank you for your comments so far, all very accurate and now I am thinking 70-300 is what I really need.

Mag-1981 wrote in post #15983767
Thank you for your comments so far, all very accurate and now I am thinking 70-300 is what I really need.

You'll be very happy with the 70-300L. If you have an opportunity, go play with one and you'll fall in love. The construction quality and feel of the lens is the same as the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II. It's a very stout lens. The image quality is astounding and on par with the best L lenses in Canon's lineup. The sharpness and contrast are excellent.

what is the f stop at 70 to 200 on the 70 to 300L ?

Broomer wrote in post #15983999
what is the f stop at 70 to 200 on the 70 to 300L ?

Starts at f/4 at 70mm and is at f/5 at 200mm.