June 23, 2018, 04:29:01 PM

Author Topic: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?  (Read 6080 times)

Cory

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 539
    • Running Photography
Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« on: March 12, 2018, 10:12:52 PM »
     I do a lot of "running" events, indoor stage/band and outdoor music events, etc.  Trying to figure out which telephoto zoom is the "best", but have extremely high standards having been spoiled by the best primes (with the 135 2.0 my default lens).
     With that in mind do I really need to just somehow make the 300 2.8 IS II happen and call it a day?
     Sometimes you do just have to say "**** you".  Not often, but in rare instances.
     Thanks.
6D, 16-35 4.0 IS, 135 2.0
430EXII, Induro AT113/Sirui K-20x, Sirui T-025x

canon rumors FORUM

Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« on: March 12, 2018, 10:12:52 PM »

R1-7D

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 616
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2018, 10:43:08 PM »
 :o

Halfrack

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 659
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2018, 11:43:00 PM »
What body are you working with? What other glass are you working with?

I know it sucks to think about, but really, a f2.8 is only 1 stop brighter, and we're getting much better ISO performance with the latest bodies.

The 300/2.8 is a great lens, but do you actually need the weight and size, especially if you're moving about a crowd?  You can't leave it somewhere, so you're carrying it everywhere.  Even the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 is huge, and not something to carry all day/night .  The 70-200 mk2 with the 1.4x mk3 adapter shooting f/4 and a current body is more likely to fulfill all your needs.  Even a used 1dx for the high ISO performance would be a better investment IMHO.
"Me owning a lens shop is kind of like having an alcoholic bar tender." - Roger Cicala

Cory

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 539
    • Running Photography
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #3 on: March 12, 2018, 11:44:55 PM »
A 6D.  My former set-up was a 70D and 200 2.8.  I wonder if a 6D and 300 4.0 would be very similar in the quality of pics (which were remarkable with the previous combo).
6D, 16-35 4.0 IS, 135 2.0
430EXII, Induro AT113/Sirui K-20x, Sirui T-025x

pwp

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2473
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2018, 03:01:06 AM »
Sounds like the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 might be worth a look for you. Check the weight though. It's a monopod job unless you're Mr Muscles.

-pw

PavelR

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 148
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2018, 03:13:40 AM »
Sounds like the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 might be worth a look for you. Check the weight though. It's a monopod job unless you're Mr Muscles.

-pw
+1000

edoorn

  • EOS Rebel 300D
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2018, 07:22:32 AM »
I've had the 300 2.8 II and it is an amazing lens. Just saying :)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2018, 07:22:32 AM »

chrysoberyl

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 847
  • 6D
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #7 on: March 13, 2018, 07:38:28 AM »
Why not buy the version I of this lens?  A very good one can be had for $3K.

hendrik-sg

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 224
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #8 on: March 13, 2018, 08:40:23 AM »
I would no longer buy a version 1, except for very cheap, not for 3k$. Be aware that the 400 2.8 i IS is out of Support already, so the 300 2.8 i IS can loose support any day.

The old IS system is for 2 stops help only. Yes i know, IS does not help for action stopping, but for everything else it does. I replaced my 300 by a 100-400 ii and it's better in low light, it's IS is just fantastic. on a 5d3 this one can take the 1.4iii really well, with better results than the 300 with 2x (except beeing f8 vs f5.6)

I clould use a loaned 400 2.8ii, which is just a fantastic lens. Assuming that the 300 ii is at least as good, this is a real upgrade to the zoom, the old 300 is not (expet again for action stopping and bokeh)

With some patience, you may find a used version ii, so i really recommend to save for this one, or get a 100-400 ii

axtstern

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 246
  • EOS M(ediochre)
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #9 on: March 13, 2018, 09:15:32 AM »
Well some advice from an idiot that likes to buy heavy and expensive glass...

If the Price of the 300 IS II is a burden than don't do it.
Once you have spent the money you will learn that the lens itself is another burden.
I had my fast, faster, fastest Phase and it generated a mountain of glass which I rarely use.
The only heavy White I use regularily is a non IS 400mm 2.8
If it is 2.8 or faster and 300mm or longer than I do no longer bother with IS as my will to hand hold it diminishes towards zero. So with a sturdy tripod, a dedicated heavy duty head and a few Kilo of tin and glass mounted on it I'm as agile and  mobile as an AA gun in a digged in Position.

I own the Sigma 120-300 2.8 Version one since my children have reached an Age that I can't hang it on the Baby Buggy it was never used.

The solution that worked for me was to buy a cheap used Sigma 100-300 4.0 and to accept the mediochre IQ or if a zoom was not required to use the 300 L 4.0.

As others here have said... a Camera with state of the art low light capabilities is the better way to go here. And if you want to complement your 135L wit a lens check the 300 L 4.0. It is lightweight and I love the build i lens hood.


chrysoberyl

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 847
  • 6D
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #10 on: March 13, 2018, 09:53:38 AM »
With some patience, you may find a used version ii, so i really recommend to save for this one, or get a 100-400 ii

Thank you for your information.  Yes, the loss of support is concerning.  But for me, paying US$5K for a used 300 II is not acceptable.  The 100-400 II is uninteresting because it is slow, will need frequent cleaning and frankly, not especially sharp.  I’ll continue with my 70-200 II until a viable option enters the market.

Thanks again.

PCM-madison

  • EOS Rebel SL2
  • ***
  • Posts: 79
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #11 on: March 13, 2018, 10:09:37 AM »
I also shoot many running events (but not the music events). I have both the 135mm F2 L and the 300 F2.8 L IS ii. I do love my 300, but I mainly use it for wildlife. For the running events, I almost always use the 135.

Hector1970

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 787
    • Flickr
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #12 on: March 13, 2018, 11:14:40 AM »
For sport I alternatively use a 70-200 II or a 100-400mm II or 300 F2.8 II on a 7D2 (which I'm not a fan of 7D2 that is).
The 300mm is the least flexible but it takes the best photographs.
It's really sharp and renders beautiful photographs.
The 100-400 is a good lens, the 70-200 is even better but the 300mm is just on a different level.
If you can afford it get it (its'a luxury because it is big and not really hand holdable for a normal person for any extended period of time)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #12 on: March 13, 2018, 11:14:40 AM »

Halfrack

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 659
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #13 on: March 13, 2018, 11:34:18 AM »
A 6D.  My former set-up was a 70D and 200 2.8.  I wonder if a 6D and 300 4.0 would be very similar in the quality of pics (which were remarkable with the previous combo).

The 300/4 is a great lens, but doesn't offer the flexibility of a zoom, plus it's design & IS is much older than the 70-200 mkII.

What other lenses are you shooting with?  The 135L will take both teleconverters really well, and give you some flexibility with minimal investment.

You haven't said what limiting factor you're hitting.  Do you need:
- longer lenses (less cropping of an image)
- larger files (for client deliverables)
- better ISO performance (need higher ISOs)
"Me owning a lens shop is kind of like having an alcoholic bar tender." - Roger Cicala

Cory

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 539
    • Running Photography
Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #14 on: March 13, 2018, 01:51:00 PM »
You haven't said what limiting factor you're hitting.  Do you need:
- longer lenses (less cropping of an image)
- larger files (for client deliverables)
- better ISO performance (need higher ISOs)
Thanks.  I need a longer lens (that offers similar quality to the 135) so I can remain unseen by runners.  The shot is often ruined when they seem me.
Some of my favorites, if you like, are at -
https://runningphotography.com/gallery
I wonder if the 300 4.0 IS is "it" or if maybe an 80D/200 2.8 II is a good answer.
6D, 16-35 4.0 IS, 135 2.0
430EXII, Induro AT113/Sirui K-20x, Sirui T-025x

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Do I Just Need to Suck it up With the 300 2.8 II?
« Reply #14 on: March 13, 2018, 01:51:00 PM »