Canon 300mm f2.8is II with 2.0x teleconverter III

[Canon1]

I previously owned a 300 f2.8is version I and absolutely loved that lens. Razor sharp, very versatile, small and light (relatively) and worked very well with a 1.4x TC. The one down-side is that it was very SOFT with a 2.0x TC.

I ended up selling this lens to fund a 500 f4 is Version I. I have been pretty happy with this lens for the most part, however it does not perform super well with TC's from both an IQ standpoint as well as an AF speed standpoint. I find that I almost exclusively use this lens without TC's to produce images I am consistently happy with.

I really miss my 300 2.8, and have been considering the newer version II for quite some time. I would need to sell my 500 to afford one so I thought I would ask for feedback from those who own the 300 Version II and have used it with a 2.0x converter Version III. The lens comparison tool from TheDigitalPicture indicates that this lens does quite remarkably with a 2.0x TC. So well to my eye that I am thinking it would be a nice replacement for my 500 f4 Version I, and give me the 300/420mm that I so often miss. Has anyone used this 300+2.0 combo? How do the images look? How snappy is the AF? Compared to the 500f4is? Any feedback is appreciated.

Happy Shooting,

 

[Jim Saunders]

The photo attached was taken with a 5D2. AF was at least good, I don't have a whole ream of comparison data with other lenses but I could keep up with birds of prey circling.

Jim

 

[stephan00]

I tried the 300 + 2x III both on the 5d III and the 7d, and the 5d III had no problems with quality or focussing. However, in a few instances the 7d would not even try to focus, until I had recomposed and tried again. This was maybe 3 frames out of more than 900, so nothing to worry about in my trial cases, but if you really absolutely have only one try for a shot, it does pose a small risk.

I admit that I have never tried with a 500, as the 300 is my first longer lens, but I would be inclined to say that the quality is ok. The first two with the 5, the last one with the 7 (at ISO 1250, actually a bit higher than I try to stay with this body).

P.S.: I also used the 300 with the 1.4 III and the quality and AF-speed is outstanding - and I didn't have any problems with the 7d either, so if you can afford to crop, this might be the safer way.

 

[candyman]

@stephan00 & @ Jim Saunders


Thank you for posting images. I like to see images from field use.
I am in process of saving for 300 f/2.8 MK II and plan to use it also with the 2x extender. I am curious about the IQ result. It seems to be good.

 

[Canon1]

I am shooting with a 5diii. I understand that only the 5diii, 1dx and maybe the 6d are able to fully utilize the AF power of the new superteles with version ii extenders.

I should have mentioned this in my OP. I am particularly interested in how this performs with the 5diii.

This might be a great question for neuro. It seems he has experience with just about every canon lens, tc and body combo imaginable. Neuro?

 

[mackguyver]

I just shot with this combo (it was my first time out with my 300 2.8 II) and I found it worked very well. The focus with the 2x III and 5D III is a bit slow (like any use of the 2x) and hunts unless you use the focus limiter, but is very accurate. The AF is going to be much slower than a raw 500 or 600mm lens, but if you pre-focus and use the limiter, it's going to work well, and will work well for AI Servo tracking. I used Focal the other night to calibrate as well, so that may have helped. f/8 is a tad sharper than f/5.6, but 5.6 is definitely usable. Here are two shots from today's shoot - not much to look at, but the hot weather had most critters hiding...will post more photos once I have a more productive shoot:

 

[neuroanatomist]

I am shooting with a 5diii. I understand that only the 5diii, 1dx and maybe the 6d are able to fully utilize the AF power of the new superteles with version ii extenders.

I should have mentioned this in my OP. I am particularly interested in how this performs with the 5diii.

This might be a great question for neuro. It seems he has experience with just about every canon lens, tc and body combo imaginable. Neuro?

I haven't used the 300 II (yet - it's on my short list of future purchases). The increased AF precision of the MkIII extenders apply only when used with the MkII supertele lenses (and possibly the 70-200 II, not sure about that one).

CR member AlanF routinely uses the 300 II + 2xIII with a 5DIII, you might check out some of his posts.

 

[mackguyver]

I haven't used the 300 II (yet - it's on my short list of future purchases). The increased AF precision of the MkIII extenders apply only when used with the MkII supertele lenses (and possibly the 70-200 II, not sure about that one).

CR member AlanF routinely uses the 300 II + 2xIII with a 5DIII, you might check out some of his posts.

You definitely need to keep the 300 on your list - it's a much more manageable size / weight than it's big brothers. I found this "poor man's 600mm" with the 2x very hand-holdable as well.

I keep wondering about the 70-200 II and the MkIII extenders, too. There are conflicting statements about this one from CPN, Chuck Westfall, and other Canon sources.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Another thing to consider is that TC's can have issues just like a lens. If you have a soft image with a TC (assuming proper focus), get the TC checked out, or even send the combo to Canon for checking.

Its certainly true that some lenses just do not do well with a TC, but a 300mm f/2.8 IS should not be soft.

 

[Canon1]

I am shooting with a 5diii. I understand that only the 5diii, 1dx and maybe the 6d are able to fully utilize the AF power of the new superteles with version ii extenders.

I should have mentioned this in my OP. I am particularly interested in how this performs with the 5diii.

This might be a great question for neuro. It seems he has experience with just about every canon lens, tc and body combo imaginable. Neuro?

I haven't used the 300 II (yet - it's on my short list of future purchases). The increased AF precision of the MkIII extenders apply only when used with the MkII supertele lenses (and possibly the 70-200 II, not sure about that one).

CR member AlanF routinely uses the 300 II + 2xIII with a 5DIII, you might check out some of his posts.

Thanks Neuro. I'll se if AlanF comments.... if not I'll PM him.

 

[Jack Douglas]

If you're interested you can look at my post history to see what I've gotten with the 300 II and 2X III. However, that's with the 6D. I'm not convinced I've been able to match AlanF but I'm very happy with the portability - VERY. The combination is snappy for AF in most circumstances and I find the narrower FOV allows for better AF than with the 1.4, which I've basically stopped using for smaller birds. AF is accurate, no problem there but I have a +5 AFMA set to shift slightly back compared to the +3 that the factory set when I had it checked. My early posts were all in "anything shot with a 6D" and lately I'm only posting to "show your bird portraits".

I might add that I've been out virtually every day this summer with this combination. Here's one of the uncropped shots - 300 X2 2000th F7.1 ISO 1250

Jack

 

[AlanF]

its AlanF. I am in Greece with a dodgy internet connection. As mentioned, I find the 300mm f/2.8 II + 2xTCIII to bw excellent. Just as mentioned above, the AF on the 5DIII is snappy but not as good on the 7D, where too it has occasionally failed to focus. Check my posts on Show your bird portraits for some examples. I would like to have use of a 500mm or 600mm, but the general convenience and weight of the 300mm is much better for me. I hardly ever use it with the 1.4xTC III as the extra length gained with the 2x far outweighs any minimal degradation of IQ, if any.

 

[mwh1964]

I haven't used the 300 II (yet - it's on my short list of future purchases). The increased AF precision of the MkIII extenders apply only when used with the MkII supertele lenses (and possibly the 70-200 II, not sure about that one).

CR member AlanF routinely uses the 300 II + 2xIII with a 5DIII, you might check out some of his posts.

You definitely need to keep the 300 on your list - it's a much more manageable size / weight than it's big brothers. I found this "poor man's 600mm" with the 2x very hand-holdable as well.

I keep wondering about the 70-200 II and the MkIII extenders, too. There are conflicting statements about this one from CPN, Chuck Westfall, and other Canon sources.

I use the 70-200II + 2TCIII combo for seaplanes and sport outside. I find this combo very attractive in IQ and AF. The AF might be faster than 70-300L. I most admit I don't see any noticeable image degradation with the TC. But that's probably just me.

 

[mackguyver]

I haven't used the 300 II (yet - it's on my short list of future purchases). The increased AF precision of the MkIII extenders apply only when used with the MkII supertele lenses (and possibly the 70-200 II, not sure about that one).

CR member AlanF routinely uses the 300 II + 2xIII with a 5DIII, you might check out some of his posts.

You definitely need to keep the 300 on your list - it's a much more manageable size / weight than it's big brothers. I found this "poor man's 600mm" with the 2x very hand-holdable as well.

I keep wondering about the 70-200 II and the MkIII extenders, too. There are conflicting statements about this one from CPN, Chuck Westfall, and other Canon sources.

I use the 70-200II + 2TCIII combo for seaplanes and sport outside. I find this combo very attractive in IQ and AF. The AF might be faster than 70-300L. I most admit I don't see any noticeable image degradation with the TC. But that's probably just me.

I find the 70-200II + 2TCIII combo awesome as well, though not quite as good as the 70-200 + 1.4TCII combo which seems to have almost no impact on the 70-200 IQ. It seems optimized for the Mk III extenders, but who knows. I think my new wildlife setup will be the 300 + 2x on my 5DIII and 70-200 + 1.4x on my 5DII. I can then swap or remove TCs to give me 70-600mm.

As for AlanF's comments, I echo what he says about the convenience of the 300. I was waiting (and waiting) for the 200-400, but the size, weight, and (dear God) cost of it are too much. I don't live in a dusty environment nor do I earn the majority of my income from photography, so the "inconvenience" of changing TCs (that I have $1,000 invested in) isn't a big deal for me. So far the 300 II + 1.4x III & 2x III seems to be a sweet combination, and with the 70-200 II over my shoulder and 16-35 II, 24-70 II, and 180 macro in my bag, I'm covered for just about everything that I like to shoot.

 

[Plinian]

I used the 300 2.8 ii + 2xTC iii for about a year to shoot wildlife and loved it. For my shooting (70% stationary birds, 30% medium-large BIF) IQ and AF speed seemed (and still seems) terrific, and not perceptibly different from the naked 300. All on a 5d3. For small birds, I still wanted more reach (but also wanted portability and handholding capability), and picked up a 500 ii about 6 months ago. My impression of the 300/2x combo vs. the 500/1.4x combo is that they are about the same with regard to IQ and AF speed, with a very slight edge to the 500. The Pelis and Avocet were shot with the 300/2x and the Sora with the 500/1.4.

Greg

 

[candyman]

@plinian
Beautiful picture 'avocet.jpg' !

 

[Canon1]

Thanks for all the comments and images posted.

 

[krisbell]

Just to add my 2 cents - I picked this lens up and have had one day shooting with it. Initial impressions when used with 2x extender are good image quality and decent focus performance. For me it is the only, good quality, portable long lens option available. My previous setup was a 100-400mm - in comparison I would say the IQ is comparable, but with 300m+extender combo winning out due to quality of bokeh and an intangible quality to the photos...and the fact it is 600mm vs 400mm!

All shots taken on a 5dmkiii and 2x extender...


Mating Sandwich Terns (Thalasseus sandvicensis) by Kristian Bell, on Flickr


Flying Pelican by Kristian Bell, on Flickr


Preening Plover by Kristian Bell, on Flickr

 

[Plainsman]

I previously owned a 300 f2.8is version I and absolutely loved that lens. Razor sharp, very versatile, small and light (relatively) and worked very well with a 1.4x TC. The one down-side is that it was very SOFT with a 2.0x TC.

I ended up selling this lens to fund a 500 f4 is Version I. I have been pretty happy with this lens for the most part, however it does not perform super well with TC's from both an IQ standpoint as well as an AF speed standpoint. I find that I almost exclusively use this lens without TC's to produce images I am consistently happy with.

I really miss my 300 2.8, and have been considering the newer version II for quite some time. I would need to sell my 500 to afford one so I thought I would ask for feedback from those who own the 300 Version II and have used it with a 2.0x converter Version III. The lens comparison tool from TheDigitalPicture indicates that this lens does quite remarkably with a 2.0x TC. So well to my eye that I am thinking it would be a nice replacement for my 500 f4 Version I, and give me the 300/420mm that I so often miss. Has anyone used this 300+2.0 combo? How do the images look? How snappy is the AF? Compared to the 500f4is? Any feedback is appreciated.

Happy Shooting,

Why not consider the 400/4 DO which reaches nearly 600 with only a 1.4XTC.
Lighter to carry around as well.
Seems to be a good seller for Canon.

 

[Helmi2010]

Hi,

In my opinion the 2.8 300mm MK II is with and without TC a great lens!
Some shots with the 2X TC.

Podiceps cristatus, Haubentaucher, Great Crested Grebe
Eos 7D, EF 2.8 300mm MK II + 2X MK III TC, ISO 320, F 5.6, 1/1250 Sec. Handheld, AF.

Aythya fuligula, Reiherente, Tufted Duck
Eos 7D, EF 2.8300mm MK II + 2X MK III TC, ISO 320, F 7.1, 1/800 Sec. Handheld, AF.

Aeshna mixta, Herbst-Mosaikjungfer, Migrant Hawker
Eos 5D MK III, EF 2.8 300mm MK II + 2X MK III TC, ISO 800, F 7.1, 1/640 Sec. Handheld, AF.


Best regards

Helmut