Combo or 300 F4L

So I was set on having a super-tele a while ago, which shifted to a wide angle. And now I can't decide which.

I'm pretty set on the 17-40 L, becase a) its in my price range, b) after I bought my 100mm Macro I decided I would never get another lense without FTM and c) I'll hopefully be moving to a 1D body some day.

I decided that on top of this I would get a 70-200 F4L to complement and to partially replace my 75-300.

Recently while looking through prices at my photo store, I saw that the 300 F4L IS is almost the same price as the 400 F5.6L. I'm now thinking that with the 300 and a t-con I could again get a super-tele.

Is the 300 F4L IS worth it or should I stick to the 17-40 and 70-200 combo?

So just slap me, tell me that I'm crazy for wanting the 300 and I'll go on my way.

Cheers,
Johnsoir

you're not crazy. i want the 300 too. and i think i would definitely get the 300 plus a tc over the 400.

anyway, the 17-40 and 70-200 are great lenses too. you already have that range covered with your current lenses. you'll just have to decide what you'll use more. if you want good everyday lenses than get the 17-40 and the 70-200, but if you are primarily going to be shooting birds or motorsports or something, get the 300.

I have the 400 5.6 and My G/F has the 300 F4 and uses My 1.4. Her combo is lighter than Mine and the pic's are very sharp. My 400 is better for bird in flight shots, and Her's is better when the light gets low. You will get great pictures with either one.

I have both 300mm f/4 L IS and the 400mm f.5.6 L. Both are great telephoto lenses. And for the price, not bad at all.

Hmmm thats a toughie I would go with either the 300 F4 IS or the 400 5.6L i have the 400 and she is just great.Put a 1.4 TC on the 300 you have a 420mm 5.6 lens.Good day Sean .L