300 2.8 vs. 400 2.8.

This question comes from lack of experience with ANY of the long primes, but why not the 500 f/4? Is it the extra stop on the 400 rather than the extra 100mm?

JohnPAtl wrote in post #11777004
Not sure if this is any help, Adorama has both lens listed not in stock but you can pre-order them
the 300mm is $7,000 and the 400mm is $11,000 and not sure if this will be the actual cost when they are released.. if that is the cost does anyone of you think that Canon is pricing themselves out of a market.. at some point people and business will stop paying that much of a mark up for next gen lens.

just a thought.

yeah. Ive thought about that a tad. Less people upgrading, but then again youll always have the people who have to have the newest and greatest thing. I think that will be less of a concern than we think.

sch_photo wrote in post #11777076
Thank you.... someone in the same delema as me only reversed...I have a 400mm 2.8 actually a mk I and love it... I am dreading the $6k - $10k I am going to drop for new bodies... I actually thought about selling my 400 and getting a 300 and going to 2 7D bodies w/ grips... the problem is I have turned into a 1 series snob... is there a support group for this problem or an armored truck I can hi-jack?

Have you seen "The Town"? That should answer your armored truck question.

Snydremark wrote in post #11777096
This question comes from lack of experience with ANY of the long primes, but why not the 500 f/4? Is it the extra stop on the 400 rather than the extra 100mm?

Pretty much. I am not willing to sacrifice a stop for the extra 100mm.. If I want extra Ill take the loss but for more gain in length (even if it is only 60mm lol)

canonnoob wrote in post #11775054
Bill, you also shoot much less high school stuff than I do though. Correct? I mean, the high school market is where I make my living. lol

I'm not sure.. I'd say covering about 30 high school football, basketball, and baseball games last year, including 6 High School Sports magazine covers and dozens of published high school sports images might disagree..

Just teasing.. but seriously, there isnt much different between shooting NFL and a high school football game, if anything I'd say the 400 is more useful for high school football because I have more space to move for different angles.

Easier to tell you when I felt the 300 was better choice..

Volleyball when I had upper level vantage points. Tennis, again based on shooting vantage points..

The one major event I did almost use the 300 exclusively last year was the NCAA college girls softball championships, fields and shooting spots were just too close for the 400.

And occasionally basketball, again especially if I have a upper level vantage point.

Still only a small percentage of the time. Both lenses is a no brainer if you can work it, but my 400 is my workhorse by a long shot. I can easily make do without the 300, I cant say the same about the 400.

But really, it all comes down to personal preference and shooting style..

If you can swing the money for the 400... just do that, try having both in your arsenal and then if you don't feel like you need to keep the 300, sell it. (granted, I don't have either one but I find myself in similar positions about various pieces of gear all the time. And it' s always been nice to try it out thoroughly before committing.)

Love both lenses ......If you can swing it don't sell the 300...Yea and you can still hand hold this lens....not the case with the 400..Just find a used 400 in pres teen condition..

just to throw a wrench into this, has anyone heard when the new lenses are actually being released?

Canon says March but it looks more like April. 300mm IS II's $7,000 while the 400mm IS II's $11,000.

I just got the 2x tc III. That on my 200 f2 L gives me 400 f4 and it's sterling quality. Just doesn't get any better. Focuses super fast, and no loss of IQ that I can see.

dolina wrote in post #11784705
Canon says March but it looks more like April. 300mm IS II's $7,000 while the 400mm IS II's $11,000.

any links?

canonnoob wrote in post #11784753
any links?

Scroll to the bottom of the page

Please Note: the EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, the Extender EF 2X III, and the Extender EF 1.4X III are now scheduled for delivery to retail outlets in March 2011.

http://www.usa.canon.c​om …ArticleAct&arti​cleID=3508

dolina wrote in post #11784772
Scroll to the bottom of the page

Please Note: the EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM, the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, the Extender EF 2X III, and the Extender EF 1.4X III are now scheduled for delivery to retail outlets in March 2011.

http://www.usa.canon.c​om …ArticleAct&arti​cleID=3508

The new extenders are already out right?

MDJAK wrote in post #11784736
I just got the 2x tc III. That on my 200 f2 L gives me 400 f4 and it's sterling quality. Just doesn't get any better. Focuses super fast, and no loss of IQ that I can see.

But have you shot with the 400 f/2.8 as a comparison?

Because it's so universally loved, I was convinced the 300 f/2.8 + 2X TC was of sufficient quality to avoid ever needing a longer prime.

Then I tried the 500 f/4 and there's no comparison. The IQ of "naked" glass is superior to any "invented" focal length.

canonnoob wrote in post #11784795
The new extenders are already out right?

Good luck using that logic in locating the 2010 super teles for sale.

dolina wrote in post #11784987
Good luck using that logic in locating the 2010 super teles for sale.

nah, Im just using it as a timing situation.

While everyone is wasting time debating which lens to get the price of canon lenses keeps going up...and up...and up...and up...!

I am kicking myself for not getting my lens a month ago.

Just saying.