Anybody have 300 4.0 AND 400 5.6?

Does anybody have both of these lenses and if so, do you find you still have opportunity or need to use both?

I ask because I have the 300 already and love it. But I have a chance to pick up a second hand 400 for a pretty good price in the next day or two.

So I'm wondering if people still find them of enough of a different range to make use of both still. If not, which do you use most often? Is one noticeably sharper than the other?

I don't shoot birds or wildlife but I do the occassional daytime sports and street fests where I'm not always up close to performers.

I likely wouldn't sell one afterwards just out of laziness and I also have a tendency to hold on to things (just in case :rolleyes. So I don't really consider selling an option with my current way of thinking.

I Have both, recently buying the 300mm f4. The 400mm are very good for bird photography but particulary in open because it lost light rapidly and so the shutter speed. In some situation I find it too much like with deer and moose or anithing a bit bigger than a bird and be closer, with the 400mm it's better to carry a tripod also (low shutter speed, small subject to follow, camera shake). For all those reason I buy the 300mm as a walk around lens for wildlife photography.

Though close in mm, they both are good and might both be something you'd want to keep. The 300/4 IS is great for macro. Until you need or get something longer than 400, the 400 5.6 is a good lens to have. I had both at the same time though I wound up selling them when other lenses appreared on my list.

Since you already have the 300 f/4 IS, why not get a TC 1.4? This combo is very good. Yes, the 400 f/5.6 prime is sharper if used with a tripod.

Yes and yes. I have the 300, 400 and 500 and use all of them. I use the 300 for things like the zoo or raptor center, where I can get closeup portraits. I've found the 300 great when shooting through glass. I also had some fun shooting softball this past summer with the 300. The 500 for eagles or other birds in the wild or super closeup hummingbird shots in my back yard. The 400 for more reach than the 300, but a wider field of view than the 500 (like closeup hummingbirds in flight.)

A good price on a lens you don't really need or want isn't really a good deal.

That said, I think the 300mm + TC could be a good option for you that also factors in economy.

I agree.

I have both but now use the 300F4 IS with a Canon 1.4X (420mm) and still has IS and tend to use the 400 F5.6 with a 2X Kenko on a tripod for Looong shots.