70-200mm or 100-400mm on a 6D

Scott M wrote in post #16387367
On a full frame body, 200mm for wildlife is not much reach. I own both a 70-200 f/4 IS and 100-400L, and only use the 70-200 as a general purpose telephoto when wildlife will not be a primary focus.

While the 100-400L is an older design, it is still a fine wildlife lens for the price. It is the longest lens I own, and will pair it with either my 5D3 or 7D (when I need even more reach). It is probably the best option for reach, versatility and quality in the under $1,500 range. The 70-300L is a newer design and better than the 100-400L in every way except for one critical item -- focal length.

this is great Scott and exactly what I believe. a 70-200 or 70-300 is to me essential kit for all types of photography. if you are shooting FF I strongly recommend the 70-300L. I made the switch earlier this year and I use this lens a lot for landscapes and wildlife. I also believe the 100-400L is the best compact wildlife lens, and I've used the lens in Africa, katmai and twice in Yellowstone this year (as well as everywhere in between).

Like what Scott and Ed said...

I picked the 100-400L to replace my 300 f/4L (non IS) because it focuses closer, has IS, and I never seemed to have the right lens on the camera for any situation that popped up when out looking wildlife. I really value the versatility of the zoom. And, even after using some sharp lenses like the 300 f/4L and the 70-200 f/2.8, I am quite happy with the image quality of the 100-400.

I've found I get excellent results hand-held when I keep the shutter at 1/1000 or faster. I have a boardwalk in a wetlands near my house that I visit often, and when other people walk on the boardwalk a tripod is useless there.

aha you sold everything
just only the 50 1.4
ok this lens is great with the 6D
i will say then
you need to try the Tamron 70-300 vc
lighter than the 70-200L , 70-300L and 100-400L