timgangloff Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 300mm F2.8 L USM III or 100-400 II for sports? | |
Define "sports" for your use. Does it include shooting at night under poor lighting or indoors with poor lighting? If so, 5.6 is not nearly enough. F4 is probably not enough.
Are you shooting just for fun or do you really want to make images that stand out? What body are you using with it?
Unfortunately, the choices you proposed are not great "sports" lenses for most serious sports shooters. The very old 300 2.8 non IS may or may not be serviced by Canon, I'm just not sure. So, you could be buying an expensive paperweight in the very near future. While shops other than Canon may be able to service the old lens, it doesnt' mean it will be easy to get parts down the road and is certainly something that should be considered. And the newer 100-400 is a great lens, but may not work at all for spors depending on what your sports needs are.
Although lacking in length, the 70-200 2.8 IS I or II is probably a better choice. Throw in a 1.4x III and you'll probably be better off than the 100-400 for probably about the same price.
|