BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Carlton" data-source="post: 1496144" data-attributes="member: 74973">I would recommend the 300mm f/4 with a 1.4 tc in preference to the 400mm - altho' I only own the former and have never used the 400 mm. Why? Because of the closer focal distance and IS. The closer distance allows reasonable shots of small objects, dragonflies etc, or frame-filling portraits of larger birds if you're lucky enough to get close. I'll attach some uncropped images of plumage detail from a couple of metres to show what I mean.IS improves the sharpness of my images without having to use a tripod - and it would be hard to wander around my local woods and moors with a tripod hanging from my neck. I would suggest looking through a lens with and without the IS switched on and seeing the difference it makes - movement due to breathing and heart beats stop dead. Finally, altho' the combination bought new ( and I bought mine for less ) is more expensive than the 400 mm, it also gives me the option of a 300 mm prime lens as well as a 420 mm equivalent.You will see that most of us who have opinions about these lenses will justify them but are generally happy with our choice. The more expert photographers might give more technical reasons while the less expert, such as I, will provide simpler ones. Whatever lens you finally go with, the L series lenses give beautiful, clear results. Mike</blockquote>