TLDR below.
My camera is a 77D. I've been shooting with the 55-250mm IS II for the last 12 years and in need of an upgrade. It is SLOW. I'm nowhere near professional but I've had some years of practice as an amateur and am really looking to upgrade my picture quality.
I mainly take pictures of horses, backyard birds, and take it with me on vacation and on hikes in the alps. I love to shoot the occasional wildlife such as ibex and a rock ptarmigan when I'm lucky. Again nothing professional but I have some multiple day treks on the planning this summer and I want to be better prepared.
Now I have come across two second hand lenses in excellent condition in a good camera store. A 70-300mm L IS USM or 70-200mm L f/4.0 IS II USM for 600 respectively 860 euros. Here my pros and cons:
The main thing is that the first lens weighs about 1060 g and the second one 760 g which is significant on a hike.
The second thing is that the 70-300mm L was introduced in 2010 which is rather old and I'm afraid the auto focus might not be comparable to the 70-200mm L? The reviews however look excellent, but they're mostly from 2011 lol. Does anyone know how they compare?
Third, the 70-200mm is kind of overpriced, even the guy from the store said it. They sell a f/2.8 for almost the same price. I am not rich and don't mind saving a buck.
Fifth the reach. On my crop frame body, the 70-300 will correspond to a FF 112-480 which is great.
I feel like the 70-300mm is a great chance to be honest and I am inclined to get it but was wondering if anyone advices against it?
TLDR:
What I have:
EOS 77D
My options:
70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM, 600 euros, 1060 g
70-200mm f/4.0 L IS II USM, 860 euros, 760 g
Both in excellent condition.
What I need it for:
Horses, some alpine wildlife, backyard bird photography, vacations