Canon 70-300 IS or Canon 70-200 L?

[tringbirds]

I need a travel lens. Having read reviews of the Canon 70-300 IS lens which have been rather mixed, I am now tempted by the the Canon 70-200 f4 IS lens with a 1.4 converter. Has anyone had experience of both? The travel entails travelling to the Peruvian Amazonian region. I do have the Canon 400 L but it is a little too big for the riggers of travelling. Not only do I wish to take bird pictures but also pictures of my travels,places visited etc.
Iwould bbevery appreciative of your views.
Thank you

[K-Lex]

I have the 70-200 2.8 IS L which is by far and away the best lens I've never used, bar none. The f4 version promises 90% of the 2.8 with a third of the price tag and half the weight. The 70-200 without question. You will not regret it.
Keith :)

[alexf]

the 70-200 2.8 IS weighs a ton, the weight may be the deciding factor, great lens though

[K-Lex]

the 70-200 2.8 IS weighs a ton, the weight may be the deciding factor, great lens though

You're right, it's the equivalent of carrying a couple of bricks around your neck. Therefore the f4 version is much lighter and retains many of the fine qualities of the 2.8.

:)

[tringbirds]

My instinct was to go with the L lens. Just needed to hear from other users. Thank you

[K-Lex]

No worries. Hope you enjoy the lens!

:)

[Roy C]

I have the 70-200 f4 non IS and it is a cracking lens that takes a 1.4 tc very well. The IS should be even better.

[Gemm]

the 70-200 2.8 IS weighs a ton, the weight may be the deciding factor, great lens though

It's not too bad. ;) Just a bit of muscle pain the next day after carrying it all day, but soon you'll get used to it. :t: