absolutely fantastic images.
the type of images that make me wish I was there too.
Thanks Paul. Right after I sent that message above to Tony I finally went ahead and ordered a rental of the 300 F4. It should be here next week. My thought is I can now have the 100-400 on one body and the 300 F4 on the other body. That's providing I see a noticeable improvement with the 300 over the zoom.
Should be an interesting comparison
You’ll surely enjoy the 4/300…I don’t know if you’ll need it though.
You are producing nice sharp images with the 100-400. I had one for a spell (while I was using the 4/300) and managed some sharp results but not always (like the 4/300 provided). I could never figure out the rhyme or reason how to get the consistency.
When I started birding I was using Olympus m4/3 and picked up the 4/300. After a while I was using either TC on the 4/300 most of the time (which is why I tried a 100-400).
I guess I'm just like a lot of other folks involved in this pastime. Always thinking of something else Honestly, I just wanted to rent the 300 so I can stop thinking about it one way or another. Reading reviews can only get you so far. Everything is relative in the eyes of the reviewer and the person reading/watching the review. So I'm going to do a comparison @ 300mm between the two lenses paying attention mostly to the out of focus rendering. Also I want to see if I notice any improvements with subjects at distance. Straight up sharpness comparisons are not all that important to me. If the only obvious improvement is the extra light gathering I'm not sure that's going to be worth spending close to $2000 on the used market for a focal length I already have covered.
Appreciate your input Paul. I agree, the 100-400 can be inconsistent but that's a difficult thing to pin down.
