Am I mad...

[Rolyratman]

So until recently I have mainly shot motorsport, airshows, bit of wind surfing etc and a couple of years ago I bought a second hand Canon 300mm f/2.8 mk1. I absolutely love this lens and but don't generally carry it around with me much as it is a big beast and not the best walk about lens and i'm trying to get a better general purpose lens collection together and as such am thinking of selling it, the other reason I am thinking about selling my 300mm is that being the Mk1 it's only a matter of time before it will no longer be viable to repair should something nasty happen to it.

I have also found myself wanting to take more landscape/seascape shots and have a 10-20mm and a 17-50mm f/2.8 which I use for these shots and am happy I have the lower ranges covered but need something bit longer.

So I am thinking of buying the following;

Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 Mkii which does most things well, wider motorsport shots, low light/night, longer landscape shots etc.

Originally I thought about a 70-200 F4 (Non Is) just for landscapes as this with my 10-20 & 17-50 will be quite a nice light weight and portable set up, but I think the F/2.8 would come in useful for low light/night shooting.

Canon 100-400mm Mkii which would be a great general purpose walk about lens or for wildlife, motorsport, Windsurfing etc.

I have recently sold my Mk1 Canon 100-400 as it was getting old and they were always a bit too soft at 400mm for my liking but from what I have seen the new Mkii version is really sharp and would suit my 7dmkii beautifully and it appears that the newer version is also far superior with regard to focusing speed etc.


So am I mad for thinking about selling what was for years regarded as one of the best canon lenses and getting the 70-200 & 100-400?

I

 

[Craig_85]

but don't generally carry it around with me much as it is a big beast and not the best walk about lens

So am I mad for thinking about selling what was for years regarded as one of the best canon lenses and getting the 70-200 & 100-400?

No, not mad at all. I owned a 300 2.8 ii, which was an amazing bit of glass. However, I hated carrying it around and the best lens is the one you have with you. The 7dii and the 100-400 ii is an awesome set up for many uses. I don't think you need the 70-200 as well though, maybe try and live without it for a bit then add if required. Or if you are more convinced of needing the 2.8 get the 70-200 for a while on its own and see if you miss the extra reach. Which I assume you would?

 

[TimHughes]

Sounds sensible to me. For outdoors in good light 100-400ii should be enough for most situations. I’m keeping the 70-200 and 300 for poorer light or extremely shallow dof

 

[HoppyUK]

Are you likely to need f/2.8 more than 400mm, or vice versa? If the former, get the 70-200/2.8, if the latter, the 100-400 Mk2. But don't get both, at least not until you're sure.

For my money, the 100-400 Mk2 is one of Canon's very best ever, in terms of tremendous versatility combined with great image quality and AF, with manageable size. Note the close focusing capability, too. With that, I'd never want for a 70-200 but would likely partner it with a 135/2. YMMV of course

 

[Twigman]

I have the mk2 100-400 Canon and find it is really useful and I manage to fit it in my gear bag with other kit no problem.
I notice on camerapricebuster.com that a couple of retailers are currently discounting it by £180 odd....