Help with 300mm F4L IS or 300mm F2.8L IS

The money was kind of the basis of the thread. I can do the 300 f2.8L IS. I am just wondering if that money would be better spent on the 300mm F4L IS and upgrading my 20D to a 40D. My 20D is over 3 years old and has a bunch of clicks on it. The extended warranty runs out in less than a year as well. Just trying to figure if the 40D upgrade is money better spent. As tempting as the 300mm f2.8L IS is, I think the F4L IS and the 40D plus cash in the bank is a better fit for me at this point.

Glass hold value much longer compare to body. Especially 300IS.

if you have to ask you are not ready for the f2.8

The trouble with this kind of dilemma is that, whichever option you pick, you'd be always wondering about the 'what ifs'.

Personally I would have stuck to the 20D and gotten the f/2.8, however your purposes will depict what you really need. If you shoot in good light and hardly ever need to use the lens with a 2X TC then the f/4 is a great choice. I used this lens for a while and it was light while having great resolution straight from wide open. At f/5.6 it's stellar, as you would expect from a lens of this price class.

I understand you may have already bought the f/4. If that's the case then don't worry and keep shooting. Otherwise, go back to the drawing board and put the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 on it. This is a zoom but has no IS. I have also read about wide variances in quality between copies. Some say it's much poorer than Canon's f/2.8 while others say it's really not far off. Plus, its half the price. Having a zoom for sports would be very useful I imagine. Having to add and remove a TC everytime is a PITA and could make you lose some shots.

Now I'm no sports shooter, but just wanted to add a couple of points here.

20D_Newbie wrote in post #5280088
The money was kind of the basis of the thread. I can do the 300 f2.8L IS. I am just wondering if that money would be better spent on the 300mm F4L IS and upgrading my 20D to a 40D. My 20D is over 3 years old and has a bunch of clicks on it. The extended warranty runs out in less than a year as well. Just trying to figure if the 40D upgrade is money better spent. As tempting as the 300mm f2.8L IS is, I think the F4L IS and the 40D plus cash in the bank is a better fit for me at this point.

Sorry if I missed that. I just saw a few posts without cost in mind, so I wanted to bring them up.

As for my opinion (finally, sorry it took me three posts to get it), a 300mm 4 IS L lens and a 40D is a great deal right now.

If you had a 30D already, it would be a really tough decision.

But upgrading the AF system, adding Liveview, maybe some Mpixels?, and definitely the latest Canon technology, will make up for the difference between the 4L and the 2.8L.

Best of luck, and whatever you choose, just make sure you are the one making the last decision, 'cause you can't sue us.

Bubble wrote in post #5280514
Glass hold value much longer compare to body. Especially 300IS.

Body's come and go - Glass is forever

20d to 40d the wow factor is maybe 60%
going to the beloved 300mm f/2.8 is a wow of 100%

This is one piece of amazing glass

20D_Newbie wrote in post #5280088
The money was kind of the basis of the thread. I can do the 300 f2.8L IS. I am just wondering if that money would be better spent on the 300mm F4L IS and upgrading my 20D to a 40D. My 20D is over 3 years old and has a bunch of clicks on it. The extended warranty runs out in less than a year as well. Just trying to figure if the 40D upgrade is money better spent. As tempting as the 300mm f2.8L IS is, I think the F4L IS and the 40D plus cash in the bank is a better fit for me at this point.

Don't get the f/4.

Get the 40D.

Get a 100-400.

Have fun, and you'll be in a better position in time to decide where to put big bucks. The 100-400 will give you great shots in its range, but don't try a TC on it, IMO. If, after a while, and you have saved the money, you decide you need more reach, it may be the 300 f/2.8 with a TC, or it may be a 500 f/4...

Even if you get a big prime, the 100-400 will serve you well. On the other hand, if you get the 300 f/4, you will IMO tend to second-guess yourself. With the 100-400, you won't have that problem, because you can always pack that lens in places the big primes won't go.

Go for the 2.8 and wait on a new body. There is a bigger difference between the lenses than the bodies.

I have the f4 and it's a great lens for daylight sports and portrait. Very light and very fast focus.

With that said, I'm saving up for the 300/2.8 just because everyone and their mom has one

Here's a shot with the 300/f4

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

tonylong wrote in post #5282288
Don't get the f/4.

Get the 40D.

Get a 100-400.

Have fun, and you'll be in a better position in time to decide where to put big bucks. The 100-400 will give you great shots in its range, but don't try a TC on it, IMO. If, after a while, and you have saved the money, you decide you need more reach, it may be the 300 f/2.8 with a TC, or it may be a 500 f/4...

Even if you get a big prime, the 100-400 will serve you well. On the other hand, if you get the 300 f/4, you will IMO tend to second-guess yourself. With the 100-400, you won't have that problem, because you can always pack that lens in places the big primes won't go.

I haven't really thought about the 100-400mm. I assumed the focus speed would not be on par with the 70-200mm series or a prime like the 300mm or 400mm. I would opt for the 400mm except it does not have IS. I am also a little turned off by the push-pull of the 100-400mm, but that is a subjective thing I guess.

400 f/5.6 really LIGHT in weight. You don't need IS for it.

I agree. The 400mm is so tiny and light. I love the prices they go for in the f/s section.

I am not sure the thread was about the Zoom lens, but the 100-400mm is a Push/Pull design, so try it before you buy it. It happened to me, and because I am a weirdo, I could not get used to the idea of its operation, so it stayed at the store. (This has nothing to do with its Quality, which is very positive all throughout these forums).

100-400L is quite slow to focus on xxD series. Since my 1dmk2 is out I tried 100-400L on my 30d for soccer and had hard time getting consistent focus in AI servo mode. Now ith 1dmk2, it is much better.

For sports and wildlife, 300mm f2.8 IS is the best option, You get one of the best sports lens and quite manageable 600 f5.6 IS (with 2xTC) for wildlife etc.