I'm afraid it's a bit too expensive even if I were to sell my current Mark 1 version.

I'm mainly interested in which lens is more capable of delivering the better sharpness at/near 300mm. I've read the specs for the Nano version, and once had the original 70-300 IS USM non-L version. But the IQ (especially the sharpness) has not been discussed very much, especially with the newer Nano version.
I'm considering one of these lenses to replace my Canon 100-400 "L" Mark 1 lens due to it's heftiness, but it does deliver great results. I really need to get useable results close to 300mm wildlife. I know longer would be better, but have found 300mm doable for my purposes. I have the Canon 55-250mm STM lens and find it to be excellent at 250mm, even when cropping. Just need longer. I also have tried the newest Tamron 70-300mm lens, but was disappointed in it's results. However, I may have had one of the bad samples (rather common) with that lens; as many do rave about it.

I'd really appreciate hearing from actual users about this; as I know the written specs pretty well.

I have read nearly all reviews of this lens, but would like to hear from any HHD users who might have actual hands on experience with it. The reviews make it sound much better than expected. But is it simply another "compromise" lens; unable to do anything really well. Or might this be a "jack of all trades lens" that can come very close to delivering the goods.
Comments from REAL users would be most appreciated.

Thanks

I'm (the OP) not in any particular hurry. But may consider "Eventually" listing my gear "For Sale" if no nibbles within a reasonable length of time. Keeping my DSLR gear is also still an option, too.

I will look into the Olympus trade deal. Thanks for pointing it out to me.

I realize that such a deal is a long shot. But almost made such a deal about a year ago. So I know there might be someone out there who just might have interest in dealing with me. Besides I have since purchased the Canon 100-400mm (Mk1) "L" lens. That's what actually has me looking at something lighter now. A great lens, by the way, just too hefty for me to use often without extra support.

Am feeling the need to downsize in size and weight, for age related physical reasons, and so am offering my Canon DSLR gear in exchange for your Olympus OMD-EM?? or similar gear.
I have the following: Canon T2i camera body, and the following lenses.
Tamron 17-50 f2.8 caps and hood
Canon 10-18mm f4.5-5.6 SMT with caps and hood
Canon 40mm f2.8, SMT, with caps.
Canon 55-250mm SMT with caps and hood
Canon 100-400 IS "L" lens with caps hood, tripod collar and case
All of my gear is in near LN condition, and blemish free.

If such a trade might be of interest to you, shoot me a PM and we can "talk" at more length and work out some details. Ideally, I'd like to swap all of my Canon gear as a whole.

Is your Canon 70-300mm L lens still available? If so I have a beautiful Canon 100-400mm (Mk1) L lens willing to trade for it.

Bob

If we take "substantial" away from zoom lens and replace it with "decent" or "healthy", do we have a candidate?

He was pretty strong about not wanting a cell phone, but a real "camera' instead. No need to argue that cell phone do have real cameras. You know what I'm sayin'.

I have a friend who would like to find a 1)small(very pocketable)camera with a 2)substantial zoom range, and a 3)eye viewfinder. All 3 wants are important to him. He has been using (now very beat up from use) an older small Canon camera that easily fits into pants pocket. This request is out of my realm, so thought I'd ask here. I know your first suggestion would be to simply use his cell phone. But he really wants a camera camera if such a critter exists. So, does it? Thanks.

amfoto1,

Thanks for the very complete run down of possible decent tele lenses. Kind of summarized what some others have stated.

Just for clarification, you stated that a 2X Kenko HD TC might not be wise, but how about the 1.4X version of the same TC?

But won't the 55-250mm lens lose AF once the Kenko TC is attached? I sure do like knowing that my lighter 55-250mm lens could see about 90% of the action, though. I really like that lens. Then, specifically, which Kenko 1.4X tC are you referring to? I think Kenko has a couple 1.4X TCs.

Thank you ddonlewis, and all other commentors.

Would the Canon 400mm 5.6 lens be considered a "heavy" lens? How might it compare to the others weightwise?

The body is a Canon Rebel T2i.

I had considered the Canon 400mm 5.6, but understand it is NOT an IS (image stabilized) lens. I must have that feature on all lenses; as i often shake (age related) a bit.