Shot these in "Loupey" mode :thumbsup:

I am continuing to be amazed at the versatility of this lens. I just threw it on the 1DsMII, slung it over my shoulder, and headed out to my feeder area to fill them up for the week. As I'm walking out (my feeders/blind are in a wooded area behind my home), I noticed the Zebra Long-Wing flitting about. I just casually shot these hand held at about 5 feet. Both crops are around 12mp in size! That's pretty darn good for a bug without a macro lens, and on a full-frame CMOS sensor to boot!

http://CatcherofLight.smugmug.com/photos/222932591-X3.jpg

http://CatcherofLight.smugmug.com/photos/222932432-X3.jpg

Two great images. I've read several reviews that the 300f/4 is a great lens. I might just ask for one for Christmas.:D

Cassie.

I found the 300 f/2.8 fantastic.

Good shootin' :thumbsup:

I have been meaning to ask you how you thought the image quality of the 300mm f/4L IS (with 1.4x TC if you've tried it yet) stacked against the 100-400 f/5.6L IS. I know many people consider the zoom for wildlife shooting and I had to think long and hard when I was initially considering the 300mm against the zoom and the 400mm f/5.6L prime.

Wait until you try it with an extension tube or two.

I like to think of this lens as the Swiss Army Knife in my bag :)

Loupey - I haven't even tried the TC on this lens yet. Having the 600 in my arsenal, I really don't have the need. I can definitely see some tubes in my future though. I do think the 100-400 gives you more versatility, but this lens is MUCH faster, and I think edges out the 100-400 in most cases. I've also heard that the 400 f/5.6L is a "secret" weapon as well. Art Morris swears by his. Bottom line is that primes are much quicker and lighter weight than the zooms, and are arguably sharper as well (although I think that's more to do with the photographer than the lens, as I have many super-sharp images from my zooms).

Paul - That 300 f/2.8L is a fantastic lens. It's just a bit too bulky to carry as a second body/lens for us nature nuts who are already carrying 45 pounds worth of super-telephoto gear. Most nature photography is shot at f/4 and smaller anyway. Not enough DOF at 2.8 for most of my work. I have f/2.8 from 16mm through 200mm. I rarely shoot them bigger than f/4.