May 24, 2018, 11:50:08 PM

Author Topic: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem  (Read 14010 times)

pwp

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2456
Re: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem
« Reply #15 on: November 04, 2013, 01:28:08 AM »
I did get chance shoot with 300 f2.8 IS II + 5D III. AF is super fast(without TC of course). To me, IQ is better than 70-200 f2.8 IS II, might have to do with 300mm compression. I have no problem shooting this lens without mono/tripod.

Although I haven't try it yet, many claimed this lens works really well with TC III (x1.4 and x2). So having 300mm @ f2.8 IS II with couple TCs is not a bad idea for those on tighter budget(like me).

The number one reason holding me back is, I don't use this 300mm often. I hate to spend large amount of money on a lens that just sit in the bag. With 2 kids (2 & 5yrs) and busy work schedule, I'm not sure when I will be shooting wildlife & surfing etc...
Yes, unless you have a comfortably high disposable income or have reasonable certainty that a high cost lens like a new 300 f/2.8isII will be important to your business and earn you plenty of money, then providing for your family really must come first. Young kids are awesome!

Any business should do a properly informed ROI calculation (Return-On-Investment) on any major purchase. If the sums don't stack up, then leave your credit card in your wallet or pretty soon you won't have a business at all.

-pw

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem
« Reply #15 on: November 04, 2013, 01:28:08 AM »

drummstikk

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 105
Re: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem
« Reply #16 on: November 04, 2013, 02:11:05 AM »
Depending what it is you're shooting, would it be worth considering one of the greatest "sleepers" in the EF lens range, the 300 f/4is. This lens is incredible, pin sharp wide open, light to carry, quick AF, takes 77mm filters and very moderately priced.

Had to take a minute to second this motion. I took a major financial hit earlier this year that forced me to sell off my 70-200 2.8 and a well-loved 400mm 5.6. It's a stretch to say photography is my "business" anymore (I work another job to make ends meet and for health insurance), but I do do still service a couple of substantial contracts and have a small but loyal clientele. Losing those two lenses put me back into "fake it 'till you make it" mode, and I do quite a bit of lens renting. I've rented 300mm 2.8 and 300mm 4.0 lenses multiple times each, and other than the times when "only 2.8 will do," I find the 4.0 lens to outshine the 2.8 in just about every way. Handling, weight, and balance are all superior with the 4.0 (at the cost of an f-stop, of course), and the biggest surprise is that autofocus is noticeably snappier with the 4.0. Even when I manual focus (which I do quite a bit) the image in the viewfinder is crisp enough that I can forget I'm looking through an f/4.0 lens.

As a side comment, I'm amazed how much I *DON'T* miss the 70-200mm 2.8. My 24-105 covers part of the range and a 135 2.0, occasionally with 1.4x converter, covers the rest. It's rekindled in me shooting methods and strategies I learned when I first started in photography in the 80's. (Yeah, baby, remember the 80's? It was the time when nobody called lenses "primes," we just called them "lenses" because zooms were the oddballs and, for the most part, sucked.)

The zoom encourages a lot of standing in one place "cropping in lens" when it is a good exercise sometimes to just move your physical butt closer to the subject or, sometimes, to know when to back off. I'd encourage anyone to leave the zoom at home from time to time and explore other hardware and to question the presumed indispensability of the 70-200.
"Focused. Or focused not. There is no 'almost.'"

                                                          --Yoda (paraphrase)

AlanF

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3514
Re: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem
« Reply #17 on: November 04, 2013, 05:09:21 AM »
Drumstikk
What body were you using when you compared AF speeds of the 4 and 2.8? Roger from Lensrental once explained that the II series big whites use a feedback loop for which you need the 5DIII or 1Dx to take advantage, I find the f/2.8 300mm II does focus much faster on the 5DIII than on the 7D. This is most noticeable when the 2xTC III is attached.

The reason I went for the f/2.8 was to use it with extenders for nature photography. The f/4 is a very fine lens when bare but it takes a hit with the 1.4xTC, whereas the 2.8 doesn't, and a big hit with the 2xTC, whereas the f/2.8 is still excellent. There will be some people for whom the f/4 with 1.4xTC is good enough, but even more would prefer the good old 400m f/5.6.
5D IV, 5DS R, 400mm DO II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, EF 1.8 STM,  EF 24-105, 100-400 II, EF-S 15-85, Sigma 150-600mm C, EOS-M5 15-45, f/2 22, 11-22, Samyang 8mm f/2.8 fisheye: sold 7D II, EOS-M, Powershot G3 X,  Sigma 10-20, EF 300/2.8 II, 70-200/4 IS.

P_R

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 47
Re: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem
« Reply #18 on: November 04, 2013, 06:04:37 AM »
JPAZ, thank you for creating an itch that few of us can scratch!  :-)  There is a medical term for this surely...

Still, in the overall scheme of things, spending money on photography, even for a 300 f/2.8 (or 1dx for that matter) is small change compared to people with gambing / drinking / drugs / womenising (or men-ising!) / choose your addiction(s).  You know why you want this lens, because it does what others cannot. 

At least that's how I justified to my wife a recent body upgrade.  And when you have the results to show for it, then it can be partially justified.  That is of course if you have the money but not the approval!

If you don't (and that's me) then you keep trying to scratch...

Now I'm going to search for a thread titled "Anything shot with a 300 f/2.8....."
It doesn't matter where you start, it's where you finish.  All that counts is the photograph.

drummstikk

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 105
Re: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem
« Reply #19 on: November 04, 2013, 08:02:49 AM »
Drumstikk
What body were you using when you compared AF speeds of the 4 and 2.8? Roger from Lensrental once explained that the II series big whites use a feedback loop for which you need the 5DIII or 1Dx to take advantage, I find the f/2.8 300mm II does focus much faster on the 5DIII than on the 7D. This is most noticeable when the 2xTC III is attached.

I wouldn't say I was "comparing" as such, but simply noticing the performance of what I happened to be using at a given time. I use 7D's and have heard this assertion before about 1D's in particular being better at AF, in part due to the higher voltage battery that simply yields more power for driving the AF motor. Though it does seem odd/interesting to imply it takes a body manufactured in 2011-12 to fully utilize the advantages of a lens released in 1999.

My choice of 7D's relates to their good balance of reasonable cost in relation with very good sensor performance. There's also the good number of megapixels that gives decent room to crop without gobbling up my terabytes any faster than necessary. Also the "gripless" configuration is preferable to me, especially in the not-infrequent cases where I use a flash bracket.


The reason I went for the f/2.8 was to use it with extenders for nature photography. The f/4 is a very fine lens when bare but it takes a hit with the 1.4xTC, whereas the 2.8 doesn't, and a big hit with the 2xTC, whereas the f/2.8 is still excellent. There will be some people for whom the f/4 with 1.4xTC is good enough, but even more would prefer the good old 400m f/5.6.

Yes, I was one who preferred the 400mm 5.6 by far over the 300mm 4.0/1.4x combo (and why I was so sad to sell the 400mm). We definitely agree on the fact the 300mm 4.0 does take a performance hit with the 1.4x. I never use a 2x and can't comment on that. Results with lenses like the 135mm 2.0 or the 300mm 2.8 coupled with a 1.4x, even my 20-year-old "Mark 1" version, are virtually indistinguishable from the same lenses "solo."

And I certainly didn't mean to give any impression I criticize anybody's decision to go with a 300mm 2.8. Believe me, if I had a good financial cushion and could afford the lens without using "what's in your wallet?", I would buy one TODAY. But finance charges on such a lens would exceed what I lay out in rental in a given year. If I *had* one, I'd use it very frequently, but I have to look at how often I *need* one, which is far less.
"Focused. Or focused not. There is no 'almost.'"

                                                          --Yoda (paraphrase)

jhpeterson

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 223
Re: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem
« Reply #20 on: November 04, 2013, 09:13:42 AM »
I heartily agree with the majority of others who find the 300/2.8 to be a stellar piece of gear. The primary subject of my work is racing sailboats and this is THE "go to" lens for most all situations. I'll often pair it with a 1.4x when I need a bit more reach.
The most affordable option, of course, is picking up an early version, whether it's the original IS or the even older non-IS. I've had two of the latter over the last 20-plus years and they have served me very well. The sharpness is incredible; the "look", perhaps even better. Note, though, that Canon US won't service the non-IS. If something goes wrong, you may be out of luck.
Not only are these lenses exceptional by themselves, they're very good when matched with Canon's converters. Other than slower autofocusing, I've found little loss with the 1.4x, and used with the 2x, while not in the same league, is not so far behind.

As for stacking both the 1.4 and 2x, they're more than acceptable for those times when you must have the shot, though be forewarned that focus will be slow. So, you might need a captive subject. Attached a 100% crop of a lunar landscape I shot this way.
1D series bodies (x4), L glass (x9)

johnf3f

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 862
  • Canon 1Dx
Re: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem
« Reply #21 on: November 04, 2013, 05:36:35 PM »
Appreciate the advice. Actually I rented the f/4 a few years ago and it also is a nice lens.  Just did not feel the same infatuation.  IQ was pretty good ( I used on my 50d) and despite the loss of a stop, it worked pretty well in low light but never tried it wit a TC.  I'd be concerned about the focus ability with a TC although the 5diii is supposed to do OK with f/8.

It is a whole lot cheaper but, I'd really need to try it agin in low light to compare.

I currently own both the 300 F4 L IS and the 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1. Except for weight and price the F2.8 version is better in every way. This is not to decry the F4, I love mine but I cannot justify having both lenses! The F2.8 lenses ability to handle extenders makes it a VERY flexible lens and it gives surprisingly good quality images with the Canon 2 x Mk3 extender (I wasn't happy with the Mk2). The F4 can produce usable images with the 2 x but they are few and far between, though it's fine for record shots.
I bought my 300 F2.8 via E Bay and was very happy with the price (about $3200 US in ripoff Britain) and condition. A while ago I also bought an EF 400 F2.8 L (original version) for a steal on E Bay and my latest big E Bay purchase was a Canon 800 F5.6 L IS at a VERY reasonable price. I would have had none of these lenses without E Bay! You need to be careful and I will only bid if I can collect the lens in person, try it out and then pay.
I am afraid you made a big mistake using that lens, you will not be happy until you get one!
Canon 1DX, 7D2, 16-35 F4 L IS, 24-70 F2.8 V2, 100 F2.8 Macro, 100-400 L IS Mk2, 300 F2.8 L IS, 800 F5.6 L IS, Holga Pinhole lens.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem
« Reply #21 on: November 04, 2013, 05:36:35 PM »

discojuggernaut

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 25
Re: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem
« Reply #22 on: November 05, 2013, 01:21:04 AM »
I agree with the sentiment above about the 300 being very versatile with the extenders (i have both mkII's with the IS mkI).  It is a great piece of handholdable kit that performs well with the 2x, great with the 1.4x, and amazing naked.  Great AF, decent IS, and incredible image quality and bokeh with almost no difference in sharpness stopped down.  I was fortunate enough to find one at a decent price in excellent condition used on craigslist (it had camo protective gear so the finish looks brand new) and have loved every time i've pulled it out.  I would only consider selling it to fund a mkII version or a 500 f/4 (i shoot kiteboarding, events, portraits).

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 300 f/2.8 -a big problem
« Reply #22 on: November 05, 2013, 01:21:04 AM »