Should I let my 300 2.8 go?

Since buying the Canon 500 f/4 it's all I've pretty much used! It's mainly bird photography I find myself doing here in Guernsey as that's pretty much all we have here but I'm worried I'd regret selling the 300 for when I make any wildlife based photography trip to the mainland or France. Plus next year we're planning on going on safari. Everytime I see the 300 in my bag I think how I could sell it and get a 1DMkIII

As well as the 300 I have the 100-400 which I do use a fair bit.

Your thoughts please on what you'd do in my shoes?

it depends on your shooting style. I find the 300 a handy tool to have for woodland birds where handholding is often necessary. I've used it on and off for shooting forest birds in peninsula malaysia. But thats a whole different ball game i reckon. Sell it if u're not using it, as the 100-400 will more than do for shorter lengths.

If you're going on safari the 100-400 will be of more use to you and you'd probably be better off with the 1dMkIII body than the 300 lens sitting idle. Bird photography seems to require length more than anything and you will find you're using the 500mm almost always.

Rob

Paul - personally I wouldn't get rid - you'll find that a useful lens in Africa, and some funny things happen with Canon prices too - so I wouldn't be in too much of a hurry to get the MkIII (says he who would kill Gods cat to have one in his bag repleate with 600f4)

Andy

I'm going to keep it

A wise decission methinks Paul

Yes I don't know what came over me for a while there