Upgrade 300 F4 IS with 300 f2.8 IS

[IIIHobbs]

With the new 300 F2.8 IS II available, there are a large number of used 300 f2.8 IS available for sale.

I have had my 300 F4 IS for about 4 months and have been very pleased with the results; speed, sharpness, color rendition, etc. However, what I read about the f2.8 IS says it is even better (best).

Is this a no brainer to spend the $3000-$3500 on the f2.8 IS to get superior results than the f4 IS?


300mm @ f4 1/1200

[bdunbar79]

I upgraded and this is why.  I'm going to be shooting football this fall, some games during the day and some night games.  The 2.8 lens focuses quicker and more accurately than the f/4, so I really had to upgrade.  There are better AF sensors in the lens than the f/4 version and you'll have a much higher hit rate, especially action in low light.  Btw, I went with a great condition 300 f/2.8L I IS vs. the newer v II for much less money. 

[risc32]

i've never used the f4 but own the 2.8 version. I think it would depend on your shooting requirements. The 2.8 is pretty damn large and heavy. Sure it's a pancake lens compared to the 400 2.8 or something, but compared to a 70-200 or something it's in a whole other league. And that goes for the attention you're going to get as well when you whip it out, wanted or not. I have used my 70-200 instead as the attention this lens attracts can be problematic. I've honestly thought to myself, well if someone tries to rob me on my way to my car, i'll beat them silly with the 1dmk2 300mm2.8 combo, the guys at the forum will get a kick out of that, and i'm sure canon service can fix any damage. to the lens that is. The f4 is much lighter, less expensive, smaller, less attention getting, and focuses noticeably closer. That said if you NEED 2.8, and you can actually get this lens for 3k i guess you have your answer.

[IIIHobbs]

risc,

Appreciate the very poignant comments.

I hadn't really considered the negative attention aspect before. Granted, I am shooting in neighborhoods I know (trust), but you are right, the obvious difference of the f2.8 is significant.

"Need 2.8" there lies the rub. The circumstance I am using the 300 really do not warrant a 2.8 aperature. The primary desire for the 2.8 is to get f4 with a 1.4x attached.

As for my net cost calculation, it was derived from assuming I can sell the f4 for $800-$900 and buy the f2.8 for $3800-$4400

[risc32]

I see your math, sorry, i should have picked up on that. There have certainly been a few times when i used my 70-200 instead of the 300mm 2.8 simply due to either it would be to much of a distraction or it would be very possible to draw the attention of a thug. Although really, it would be much better to use my heavy monopod as a weapon then the 300mm, i'd really prefer not to have an encounter in the first place. Unless they are unarmed and give me fair warning, but i don't think it happens that way.  At least 1/2 of the time my 300 has a 1.4 ext mounted on it, so i know just what you're thinking on that. That is a very nice option to have. Probably enough for me to recommend it.

[wickidwombat]

the MTF charts for the sigma 120-300 f2.8 look quite impressive

its a beast of a lens though

[bdunbar79]

I just got my 300mm f/2.8L IS version I today and it is simply magical.

[risc32]

Before i bought the 300mm I'd only seen the big teles in Canon's line up from afar. When i first picked it up i was really surprised and impressed. This is really a tool, like the 1d series. Unfortunately i was only able to see it's real performance when i got my 5dmk3. Up until that point i just wasn't getting it, it didn't really seem to do THAT much more than my 70-200. I was never sure if it was the sensor, or AF. Maybe it was both, either way all in now revealed and the 300 is pretty amazing.

[IIIHobbs]

Well, I just won a used 300 f2.8 IS (and a used 1.4x II) on eBay. Hopefully the lens is as mint as the seller and images said/show. If so, the 300 f4 will be listed a few days later.

Appreciate all the replies, looking forward to getting outside with these new toys.

[bdunbar79]

Well, I just won a used 300 f2.8 (and a used 1.4x II) on eBay. Hopefully the lens is as mint as the seller and images said/show. If so, the 300 f4 will be listed a few days later.

Appreciate all the replies, looking forward to getting outside with these new toys.

Go outside and set it up on a tripod, then pick an object and open the lens up to 2.8 and fire off a few shots, perhaps using 3-shot AEB.  It has something special the f/4 doesn't have.  Then stop it down to say, f/8 to f/11 and it just keeps getting better.  Congratulations and you won't regret it one bit.  I rate it in the class of the 200 f/2L.

[IIIHobbs]

It'e here and it's raining 

Looks like I will have to wait until the weekend to give a go. I  tried a few test shots inside, but the 8' minimum focus distance was limiting my success a bit.

Not as big and heavy as I expected reading about it. The lens feels good in my hand, solid, I like it.

[bdunbar79]

It'e here and it's raining 

Looks like I will have to wait until the weekend to give a go. I  tried a few test shots inside, but the 8' minimum focus distance was limiting my success a bit.

Not as big and head as I expected reading about it. The lens feels good in my hand, solid, I like it.

It is heavy, but that problem will be ignored once you test it out.  I use one on a monopod for football and track and love it.  Glad to hear you got it!