Upload & Sell: Off
I wasn't suggesting the 45-175 in place of the 100-300. It is just that I've been loving the 45-175 more and more, I have the 35-100 2.8 on order but I don't know if I need it now. The 45-175 has more range and is smaller and lighter but of course slower. I don't really need the speed but it is nice to have.
My main point was that with any 300 lens you might be disappointed due to thermals over long distances. It depends on where you shoot. In the woods you are probably OK. I shoot over farm fields and get lots of thermals. I have the 100-300 and love it. I shot dirt car races Sunday and used the 300 and got very sharp results, but no thermals to contend with and shorter distances. Over a field on a warm day, forget it
Here is a car shot at 300mm, 7.1, 1/640, iso400..