Need advice on telephoto zoom Lens

[CarlTN]

Are you saying you already own (or have tried) the 70-300L?  I must be confused.  I'm talking about the white L lens, not the DO, or the other one.

If you're saying the white 70-300L has a panning mode, that's news to me.  I should work toward buying one, myself then!

[dr croubie]

Yeah, I had the 70-300 IS USM non-L, then i ditched it and got the 70-300L.
It's certainly got the mode 1-2 switch (I could just take a shot of the lens, but I like this photo more).

[dr croubie]

OK, finally found the manual and scanned the relevant pages (not the best scan, I've never done flatbed before, only negatives)

[CarlTN]

Thanks doc.  You could just send me your 70-300L for a few weeks, since you don't have room for it. 

I stand corrected, I had simply looked at incomplete info (and also don't recall seeing it on Canon's site). 

"Image Stabilization 4 stop, 2nd Generation, tripod sensing"

The rental site describes the 100-400L differently:

"Image Stabilization 2 stop, panning mode"

Since it does have panning mode after all, certainly the 70-300L seems like the ideal zoom lens for a full frame camera.  Small enough to carry around, goes to 300mm.  f/5.6 at the long end, but since you can shoot (or I would shoot) up to ISO 25.6k or more...that makes it not such a slow lens, as it would be on my XXD camera.

Here's a shot I did last fall of yet more deer, with my pre WW2 era 50D, at ISO 6400 (keep in mind that is "H1" on this camera)...with a 270mm f/4 (135 f/2 + 2.0x TC ii), 5 minutes after sunset, hand-held, no IS.  The PS-corrected noise (and downsampled size) certainly look smooth enough to me for "web viewing".  Opinions vary.  Not quite a pro quality shot, but way above amateur 

[pgsdeepak]

Thanks everyone for your valuable opinion. Now I removed 70-200 F4 IS from my list, even though it got some great reviews. I am not a pro, so I would trade the sharpness of the lens for some additional reach. Also I am not looking for a telephoto prime 300mm and above. that leaves me with 70-300L and 100-400L to choose from. Both are almost identically priced. 70-300 mm is newer and more compact and light for travel compared to 100-400mm. 100-400mm will give me an additional 100mm reach. tough decision to  make. coming form crop camera with a plan to upgrade to FF, I am not sure, how much I will miss the additional reach. I still dont know how good is the 100-400mm L. I see mixed reviews.  I think I should rent both and see which one I like most.
I love taking bird photographs.. Samples in the below link

Here are my options to decide from
1. Buy 70-300mmL and sell the Non L (may be buy a kenko teleconverter in the future)
2. Buy 100-400mm and keep 70-300 Non L for travel
3. Buy 100-400 and sell the 70-300mm Non L

http://www.flickr.com/photos/98679084@N00/sets/72157631596245964/

[alan_k]

Granted I'm on a crop sensor (60D), but don't overlook the wide end of those zooms. I've got the 70-300L, and 70 is a pretty useful for landscape and portraits.

I do a lot of bird photography with this lens as well.  I've never used the 100-400, but my guess is that in many situations you won't do any worse with the 70-300L. You're going to be cropping with both lenses (because, you know, birds are jerks), and the extra sharpness and better IS of the 70-300L will at least make up for the extra reach of the 100-400L.

Here's a recent set.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12341100@N06/sets/72157632681526309/

I had the 70-300 IS USM, and yeah, the 70-300L is definitely a great upgrade from the nonL lens.

[bycostello]

the weight of the lenses would be the decider for me... depends what you shoot i guess...

[CarlTN]

Pgsdeepak, the hummingbird is quite nice!

Alan, I like the fat sparrow, and also the eagle...it's even fairly sharp (if it's slightly cropped, which I assume it is).

[alan_k]

Sparrow was ~100% crop, eagle was cropped but not as much, both potentially sharpened a little in post.

This next set might be a better set to look at actually, the one I listed earlier I was leaning awkwardly out of a car window for most of the shots. Try this one:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/12341100@N06/sets/72157629929173478/with/7234291296/

[Brand B]

Here are my options to decide from
1. Buy 70-300mmL and sell the Non L (may be buy a kenko teleconverter in the future)
2. Buy 100-400mm and keep 70-300 Non L for travel
3. Buy 100-400 and sell the 70-300mm Non L

http://www.flickr.com/photos/98679084@N00/sets/72157631596245964/

Some parallels between you and me.  I upgraded from a 40D to a 5D3 last fall.  I have a 100-400L and was contemplating a 70-200 2.8 ISII, but decided (mostly due to an upcoming trip where I will be highly mobile and after dragging the 100-400 around Tokyo) to get the 70-300L instead. 

I have to say I am really pleased with it, and find I do not use the 100-400 very often any more.  Zero complaints on its performance, and the shorter reach, while every now and then a drawback, is often mitigated for me as the resolution of the 5D3 lets me crop to get the composition I wanted anyway.

To really know which I'd lean towards in your shoes though, I'd need to know how important weight, size and portability are to you.  It looks like you are doing a lot of hiking and outdoor work (somewhat similarly to me), so I
think you would end up appreciating the 70-300L.  On the other hand, for the bird shots, you will end up using the longer range of the 100-400 more than I do I think.

[CarlTN]

Alan, very nice...I'd love to go to Glacier NP too!

[pgsdeepak]

I have got 100-400 through CPS equipment evaluation for a week. First impression is, "ITS BIG and  HEAVY"!! may be not for me. I dont see me using it as often as I would like to. I also tried the 5D MIII. Loved it. SO I guess, with a full frame camera and 70-300mm focal length, it sounds like a more optimum combination for me. I did not try the 70-300mmL yet, but after reading all the reviews, I am kind of convinced, I should go for it!!!!

[CarlTN]

I did not try the 70-300mmL yet, but after reading all the reviews, I am kind of convinced, I should go for it!!!!

Glad to see someone actually winding up following the advice I gave!  Unfortunately, I am not following my own.  I decided to try a Sigma 120-400.  It's 40 to 60% cheaper than either of the Canon L zooms, and I need to conserve money (unlike some people on here...hey I'm envious of ya!).  I'm enjoying it on my Benro carbon fiber monopod.