August 27, 2014, 07:14:40 PM

Author Topic: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6  (Read 6217 times)

40dman

  • Guest
Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« Reply #15 on: May 20, 2012, 10:01:00 PM »
Hobbs, I have just recently purchased the sigma 100-300f4 to go with my 40d.
It is great and I have shot a lot of soccer (outdoors) with it.
I used to use my canon 70-200 (both of these non-IS but not needed as I shoot 1/800 or more).
If you want samples let me know.
I have even done the sigma 1.4 and while it degrades if needed for the reach it is nice.
How I am obviously not a pro but I rarely use my canon anymore so to leave a L lens at home says something.

pwp

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1500
    • View Profile
Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« Reply #16 on: May 21, 2012, 01:18:45 AM »
Well i don't follow that outside the box thinking. Get a 7d when you have a 5dmk3? So with the 7d he'll get twice the DOF, thats not going to help isolating people in sporting situations.

Have you shot with a 400mm lens? The DOF is so shallow this would be more likely to be a help than a hindrance.

Paul Wright

Birdshooter

  • Guest
Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« Reply #17 on: May 21, 2012, 04:11:02 AM »
I have had both. The 300 f/4 is a fantastic lens, but adding a 1.4x extender to it, makes the AF really slow, too slow for wildlife. The minimum aperture of 5.6 is not workable, it is not sharp enough, thus you must stop it down, at leas 2/3 making it workable 420 f/7.1 lens.

The 400 is rasor sharp, even wide open, and it's AF is superfast. It is lacking IS, but the use of a tripod or beanbag overcomes this issue.

Conclusion: If you need 400, get the 400. If you need 300, and in less then 25% of the cases need a 400, get the 300 and add the extender. I would recommend the version II rather than the version III extender.

If you can afford: Get the 300 f/2.8, like I did as well. You then have the best lens in both 300 as well as 420 full open, and a very very good 600 lens.

danski0224

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
    • View Profile
    • Some of my Work in Progress
Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« Reply #18 on: May 21, 2012, 06:07:12 AM »
I would recommend the version II rather than the version III extender.

Why?
Some of my Work in Progress..... www.dftimages.com

danski0224

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
    • View Profile
    • Some of my Work in Progress
Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« Reply #19 on: May 21, 2012, 06:42:45 AM »
Well i don't follow that outside the box thinking. Get a 7d when you have a 5dmk3? So with the 7d he'll get twice the DOF, thats not going to help isolating people in sporting situations. Then he'll be demoted to 18mp and lose, what, 2 stops of ISO performance, and get a much weaker AF system, less spiffy LCD etc. If you have a 300mm and a 5dmk3 and you think you would like a longer setup occasionally, I would get the 1.4 tele and if that doesn't get it done, crop. Or just crop now and buy nothing. I get amazing prints from my 13mp original 5d. so with my newer mk3 with 23mp to burn i see that as a built-in 2x ext when neeed This setup isn't to far removed from mine and I've got no complaints. I run the mk3 with a 300is2.8 and sometimes slap a 1.4 ext on it. Unless of course you really need 23mp files for some reason, or want to purchase, learn, and haul around another camera body, with a back up battery.

I also have a 300 f/4 and a 1.4x extender.

The change in AF speed is quite noticeable once the 1.4x extender is installed. You also go from f4 to f5.6. I am not an experienced wildlife photographer, but I view the increase in AF speed as an issue in a dynamic environment. The AF speed penalty is fine for slow moving/static subjects.

I do not have a 300 f2.8, nor do I know if the AF speed on the f2.8 lens is any different from the f4 lens.

The 300 f2.8 becomes f4 with the 1.4x, which is still better than f5.6 unless the lighting is good or unless you can crank the ISO.

I am not a DoF expert, but sometimes, the smaller sensor of the 7D would be an advantage in that respect.

Cropping will only take you so far.

The 7D still puts more pixels on the image to start with than a full frame 5 series or 1 series. So, if the image is good to begin with, the crop of a 7D image turns out bigger, if not better. Maybe not the most correct technical explanation, but the pixel density on the 7D is greater than the full frame equivalent, so the 7D shot has more pixels than a FF crop.

Yes, the 7D has some ISO limitations in comparison to the 5DII or 5DIII. But, outdoors in good lighting, I believe those limitations go away. I have many very nice outdoor images taken with a 7D and they look damn good to me straight out of the camera. They would look better if I printed them and lost the ability to pixel peep on a monitor. Better still if I did some basic post process work. In fact, if i print them on my PS (postscript) 4 color laser printer on 32lb laser paper, many of those 7D prints at 8.5 x 11 still look better than pretty much anything I ever did with a film camera printed at that size.

The images from the 1DIV are better than the 7D, but that camera costs a whole lot more than a 7D. Even used.

Given the OP's description, I still think going with a 7D is a better choice than the 1.4x extender. The word "occasionally" is mentioned, so I am *assuming* that the intent is to install a 1.4x extender when needed. This could also mean that the 300mm f4 lens is removed from the 5dIII and then could be installed on the 7D.... or the OP could leave the 300 on a 7D and then stick a 70-200 on the 5DIII.

There are many ways to approach the problem. In my opinion, the AF speed hit from the 1.4x extender is a big deal.

If the OP does not like the 7D idea either, then I would say go and get a 400 mm lens.

I would like to own one of those 400mm f2.8 lenses, but they are pretty darn expensive.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2012, 06:32:47 PM by danski0224 »
Some of my Work in Progress..... www.dftimages.com

Birdshooter

  • Guest
Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« Reply #20 on: May 21, 2012, 07:04:30 AM »
I would recommend the version II rather than the version III extender.

Why?

There is, in combination with the 300 f/4, no benefit in sharpness in the new 1.4x III version to the old 1.4 II version. AF is not any faster as well. It's just twice the amount of money.

danski0224

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
    • View Profile
    • Some of my Work in Progress
Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« Reply #21 on: May 21, 2012, 08:07:34 AM »
There is, in combination with the 300 f/4, no benefit in sharpness in the new 1.4x III version to the old 1.4 II version. AF is not any faster as well. It's just twice the amount of money.

Ah. Thanks
Some of my Work in Progress..... www.dftimages.com

risc32

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 458
    • View Profile
Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« Reply #22 on: May 21, 2012, 08:23:57 PM »
have i shot with a 400mm lens? well, no not 400mm. I stated in my post that I use my 300mm2.8 with a 1.4 tele. That would be about 420mm. Now with that setup on a 5dmk3 wide open I'd still like less DOF. And that's with the extender decreasing the DOF even if my exposure is at f4(wide open). Really, so much silly stuff has been written since my post that i really don't have the patience to respond. So if you can't beat them join them. So I say sure, with your current gear in mind, if you would sometimes like a bit more reach buy a 7d, or a 200-400mmf4 or perhaps that 400mm2.8 monster.
Now I should go and respond to the guy wanting to know how to get photos out of his camera. I think i'll suggest he get's some custom workstation made up for that, or whatever top end stuff Apple's got.

Razor2012

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 639
    • View Profile
Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« Reply #23 on: May 21, 2012, 08:37:05 PM »
I would recommend the version II rather than the version III extender.

Why?

There is, in combination with the 300 f/4, no benefit in sharpness in the new 1.4x III version to the old 1.4 II version. AF is not any faster as well. It's just twice the amount of money.

A quote from The-Digital-Picture.com:

"The image quality differences most easily noticed between the 1.4x II and the 1.4x III are:
 
The 1.4x III has less barrel distortion than the 1.4x II. This makes the center-of-the-frame details slightly smaller in a comparison. This difference will be most noticeable in the top crop shown in the ISO 12233 chart tool.
 
Anomalous dispersion glass elements are used in the Series III extenders to reduce chromatic aberration and increase resolution and contrast. The CA difference between the II and III is quite noticeable - pay close attention to this difference in the bottom ISO 12233 crops.
 
Less noticeable are the resolution and contrast differences, but some comparison examples do show improvements.
 
Contributing to the improved image quality is Canon’s Super Spectra coating which reduces ghosting and flare. Front and rear elements have Canon's fluorine anti-smear coating - making them very easy to clean.
 
Not available as I create the Canon EF 1.4x III Extender review are the announced:
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS II USM Lens,
Canon EF 400mm f/2.8 L IS II USM Lens,
Canon EF 500mm f/4 L IS II USM Lens and
Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II USM Lens.
Improvements in the Series III extenders promise to perform especially well on these specific lenses.
 
A microcomputer integrated into the Series III Extenders promises faster autofocusing and increased AF precision when used with the Canon IS Supertelephoto Series II lenses mentioned above and (I expect) all future compatible lenses. Better optical quality is also expected.
 
Note that "AF precision remains the same as the Series II Extenders when the Series III Extenders are used with earlier extender-compatible EF lenses." [Canon]
 
Note that Canon does not recommend stacking extenders. While they do not fit together due to the lack of space at the rear elements, an extension tube installed between them can be used to make the fit possible. But, Canon does not recommend using ETs at all due to reduced autofocus accuracy. Image quality from stacked extenders will not be great."
5D MKIII w grip, 70-200 2.8L IS II, 24-70 2.8L II, 16-35 2.8L II, 100 2.8L IS macro, 600EX-RT

wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4471
    • View Profile
Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« Reply #24 on: May 21, 2012, 09:39:33 PM »
you can stack a 2x canon extender with a kenko 1.4 extender because the kenko extenders fit any lens
APS-H Fanboy

Michael_pfh

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 227
    • View Profile
Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« Reply #25 on: May 22, 2012, 08:46:55 AM »
I would recommend the version II rather than the version III extender.

Why?

There is, in combination with the 300 f/4, no benefit in sharpness in the new 1.4x III version to the old 1.4 II version. AF is not any faster as well. It's just twice the amount of money.

A quote from The-Digital-Picture.com:

"The image quality differences most easily noticed between the 1.4x II and the 1.4x III are:
 
The 1.4x III has less barrel distortion than the 1.4x II. This makes the center-of-the-frame details slightly smaller in a comparison. This difference will be most noticeable in the top crop shown in the ISO 12233 chart tool.
 
Anomalous dispersion glass elements are used in the Series III extenders to reduce chromatic aberration and increase resolution and contrast. The CA difference between the II and III is quite noticeable - pay close attention to this difference in the bottom ISO 12233 crops.
 
Less noticeable are the resolution and contrast differences, but some comparison examples do show improvements.
 
Contributing to the improved image quality is Canon’s Super Spectra coating which reduces ghosting and flare. Front and rear elements have Canon's fluorine anti-smear coating - making them very easy to clean.
 
Not available as I create the Canon EF 1.4x III Extender review are the announced:
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS II USM Lens,
Canon EF 400mm f/2.8 L IS II USM Lens,
Canon EF 500mm f/4 L IS II USM Lens and
Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II USM Lens.
Improvements in the Series III extenders promise to perform especially well on these specific lenses.
 
A microcomputer integrated into the Series III Extenders promises faster autofocusing and increased AF precision when used with the Canon IS Supertelephoto Series II lenses mentioned above and (I expect) all future compatible lenses. Better optical quality is also expected.
 
Note that "AF precision remains the same as the Series II Extenders when the Series III Extenders are used with earlier extender-compatible EF lenses." [Canon]
 
Note that Canon does not recommend stacking extenders. While they do not fit together due to the lack of space at the rear elements, an extension tube installed between them can be used to make the fit possible. But, Canon does not recommend using ETs at all due to reduced autofocus accuracy. Image quality from stacked extenders will not be great."

The Canon 1.4x II and the Canon 2.0x II fit together without any problems. Of course the IQ will go down at lot due to the stacking...
1DX | 14 2.8L II | 16-35 2.8L II | 24 1.4L II | 24-70 2.8L II | ZE 35 2.0 | ZE 50 2.0 | 85 1.2L II | 100 2.8L IS | 135 2.0L | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 200 F2.0L IS | 300 2.8L IS II | 400 2.8L IS II | 500 4.0L IS