A couple of years ago I was in the market for an "L" class zoom and the 100-400 was the one I was looking at for it's image quality and reach.
A friend of mine had one and she let me borrow it for the day. I loved the reach and image quality but hated the push-pull design. I couldn't make myself like it, no matter how much I tried.
The EF 70-300L was fairly new at the time so I bought one of those instead. Other than not getting the 400mm on the long end like I wanted, this has been a fantastic lens. Super AF speed and amazing image quality. I even love how light and compact it is. But now the new 100-400L is out and has the rotating zoom like I wanted.
Question is, I still want a 400. Is the new 100-400 THAT much better than the 70-300L to justify selling my 70-300L to then dump another $1200 or so on the new 100-400?
Ken Rockwell noted in his review how fast the AF was on the new 400. How does it compare to the 70-300?
I have read the reviews but some advice from someone who has both lenses would be appreciated. Thanks!
D
A friend of mine had one and she let me borrow it for the day. I loved the reach and image quality but hated the push-pull design. I couldn't make myself like it, no matter how much I tried.
The EF 70-300L was fairly new at the time so I bought one of those instead. Other than not getting the 400mm on the long end like I wanted, this has been a fantastic lens. Super AF speed and amazing image quality. I even love how light and compact it is. But now the new 100-400L is out and has the rotating zoom like I wanted.
Question is, I still want a 400. Is the new 100-400 THAT much better than the 70-300L to justify selling my 70-300L to then dump another $1200 or so on the new 100-400?
Ken Rockwell noted in his review how fast the AF was on the new 400. How does it compare to the 70-300?
I have read the reviews but some advice from someone who has both lenses would be appreciated. Thanks!
D
