Upload & Sell: On
| p.1 #1 · Canon 300mm f/4 L IS vs 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS (I need your help!) |
Trying to decide between these two lenses is incredibly difficult!
The pros and cons as I see them:
300mm f/4 L IS
f/4 @ 300mm
f/5.6 @ 420mm w/ 1.4 Extender
Tripod mount included.
Respectable .24x maximum magnification, which improves w/ an Extender.
A little cheaper than the 70-300mm. (-$57)
There is no zoom, which means less compositional flexibility. Ouch.
A bit heavier and significantly longer than the 70-300.
Poor resell value if purchased new.
2-stop Image Stabilization is pretty outdated, as is the lens itself.
70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS
The 70-300mm range is great for many different subjects and compositions.
The 4-stop IS system increases this versatility a great deal.
It's lighter and smaller than the 300mm f/4.
Better resell value. (But not by any extreme amount.)
Stuck at a maximum of 300mm. (The 1.4 extender technically works, but I'm just not interested in rocking f/8.)
f/5.6 vs f/4 @ 300mm.
.21x maximum magnification is lower than the 300mm.
No Tripod Mount.
A little more expensive than the 300mm. (+$57)
Being a guy who appreciates his fair share of nature, the 300mm f/4 really entices me, and I lean towards choosing it over the 70-300. However, the complete lack of any zoom makes me hesitate a great deal.
Though I *mostly* use my current telephoto, the 70-300 non-L, at 300mm, I *have* on occasion found the need to zoom out, especially at my town's yearly music festival. (There, I shot a good deal at 100-200mm.)
What's a guy to do about this, when he can only have one lens? I'm stumped...