70-200 f4 vs 70-300 IS
I was just reading the 70-200 f4 post and I figured it was a good time to see what people's opinions are on the relative merits of these two lenses.
I am drawn to the 70-300 IS by the focal length and IS - i don't use a tripod unless I have to. Most of my shots are outdoors - landscape, flowers, animals, etc.
But this is my main concern: How does the IQ of the 70-300 compare to the 70-200 f4 L (in terms of sharpness, color, contrast)? Is the IQ of the 70-200 that much better? Better enough to give up 100mm of focal length and IS? (I know I could get a teleconverter for the 70-200, but this adds to the cost and hassle.)
The advice given on this forum tends to be excellent; thanks up front for any suggestions you may have.
Recent shot with 50mm 1.8 (I really enjoy this lens):
Last edited by michaelb; 06-26-2006 at 07:20 PM.
Canon 5D2, 550D, Sony NEX 5N, Sigma 15mm fish, 24L mkI, 35L, 40mm f/2.8, 50 1.8 II, Sigma 50 1.4, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro, 60mm macro, 100mm f/2, 70-200 f/4, 200 f/2.8 mk I, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, 430EX. Growing list of MF lenses!