# Which is the best?



## Q8-MC (May 5, 2013)

I just compared between Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM and Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM and I saw no difference between them. Could you guys tell me if there is a different or not?


----------



## Menace (May 5, 2013)

Both are some of the best lenses one can get. Do you mean difference in IQ between them?


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2013)

The 400 II is best...if you need a 400mm lens. If you need a 300mm lens, the 300 II is best. If you need a 50mm lens, they both suck.


----------



## Q8-MC (May 5, 2013)

Menace said:


> Both are some of the best lenses one can get. Do you mean difference in IQ between them?



I mean difference between them in everything


----------



## Q8-MC (May 5, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> The 400 II is best...if you need a 400mm lens. If you need a 300mm lens, the 300 II is best. If you need a 50mm lens, they both suck.



If both of them are best. Why they (Canon Company) put a high price between them.


----------



## expatinasia (May 5, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> The 400 II is best...if you need a 400mm lens. If you need a 300mm lens, the 300 II is best. If you need a 50mm lens, they both suck.



neuro's in top form lately!

Q8-MC - Your question makes no sense. There is 100mm difference, and that grows when you start to use TCs. What do you want to shoot, why and what is your budget?


----------



## Q8-MC (May 5, 2013)

expatinasia said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > The 400 II is best...if you need a 400mm lens. If you need a 300mm lens, the 300 II is best. If you need a 50mm lens, they both suck.
> ...



I want to shoot wildlife and I have around $10000


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2013)

Q8-MC said:


> If both of them are best. Why they (Canon Company) put a high price between them.



Who knows? Canon decided to make the 400 II over 3 lbs. heavier than the 300 II as well. I guess they felt like putting bigger glass and more titanium in the 400. Silly Canon.


----------



## jdramirez (May 5, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> The 400 II is best...if you need a 400mm lens. If you need a 300mm lens, the 300 II is best. If you need a 50mm lens, they both suck.



Funny. 

If I were to throw in my two cents... get the 300 and crop... I historically prefer to be wider than my subject and then crop in and do my composition that way... but I know you tend to lose a bit of the effect...


----------



## Canon-F1 (May 5, 2013)

Q8-MC said:


> I want to shoot wildlife and I have around $10000



well if you ask such questions and have so much money to spend.... at least get a good book about photography too.... :

a book that explains focal length and such basic stuff...


----------



## Q8-MC (May 5, 2013)

Canon-F1 said:


> Q8-MC said:
> 
> 
> > I want to shoot wildlife and I have around $10000
> ...



Thanks for the advice. what's your recommend?


----------



## tarpon6 (May 5, 2013)

> I want to shoot wildlife and I have around $10000



Then the 500mm f/4 is best.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2013)

tarpon6 said:


> > I want to shoot wildlife and I have around $10000
> 
> 
> Then the 500mm f/4 is best.


+1


----------



## Click (May 5, 2013)

tarpon6 said:


> > I want to shoot wildlife and I have around $10000
> 
> 
> 
> Then the 500mm f/4 is best.



I agree with you.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 5, 2013)

Wildlife is a pretty general term. For birds, even 800mm is often not enough.

As others noted, the 500mm f/4 is considered to be the best all around wildlife camera, and its light enough to take it out without needing a porter to carry the lens and tripod.


----------



## CanNotYet (May 5, 2013)

Another way to go is to get the 400/2.8 and some TCs. 800/5.6 is then available to you for much less money.


----------



## docholliday (May 5, 2013)

Nah, here's a wildlife lens:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/13/carl-zeiss-creates-over-five-foot-long-telephoto-lens/

just need a Rover or Jeep as a tripod to with it!


----------



## jdramirez (May 6, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Wildlife is a pretty general term.


 That's true... it could also pertain to the Kappa Alpha Gamma girls who live across the street. If that is the case, get the 500mm.


----------



## crasher8 (May 6, 2013)

They are only good for photographing books at a distance. Otherwise get a Nikon.


----------



## bycostello (May 7, 2013)

unless you take pictures of targets you won't...


----------



## sanj (May 7, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> The 400 II is best...if you need a 400mm lens. If you need a 300mm lens, the 300 II is best. If you need a 50mm lens, they both suck.


----------



## Q8-MC (May 11, 2013)

crasher8 said:


> They are only good for photographing books at a distance. Otherwise get a Nikon.



Why Nikon?


----------

