>After all this talk about the EF 300/4L IS being "a dog" and "a disaster",
I would say this discussion has been done tens of times earlier and the most common opinion has been that the IS-version is in practice as good as the non-IS version, thus better than the 100-400 zoom (even with 1.4x the 300 IS is said to be better). I have only the 100-400 zoom so no own experience though. All I can say is I wouldn't like to add 1.4x on the zoom unless I'm able to stop down to at least effective f11. You might make a search at http://www.photo.net/community/ discussion forums to find similar discussions and debates. Also Bob Atkins has comments in http://bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/300-4.html#is for both lenses. I'm sure this discussion will remain in civilized level and then fade out rapidly... ;-) Vesa _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
