I am looking to improve my capabilities in the 200-400 range. I already have a Sigma 50-500mm which is one of the best Sigma lenses out there, but it's not "L" glass.
I also have a 70-200/4L lens which I like. My initial thoughts were to go for the 100-400mmL lens to cover my needs, but having read several mixed reports on the "push/pull" zoom function and the benefits of prime lens over zoom, I am not sure. I wouldn't be at 400mm all the time. I do like the idea of the IS function having struggled with the Sigma lens without a tripod! I have read very good reports on the 300mm/4L lens itself and with the use of the 1.4X extender. Does anyone have any comparisons between the 100-400mm and the 300/4 with and without the extender? Does the extender degrade the "L" glass images? I can see a benefit to having an extender for my other lenses too, but I don't want that to sacrifice my "L" performance.

