Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS for motorsports ??????????

[Harv]

Last year I began photographing motorsports. I shot some super bike and GP car races on road courses and shot a lot of motocross and atv races. The gear I used was a 1D Mark IV along with my 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and 300 f/2.8L IS with great results.

I am fortunate to have full access to the motocross and atv tracks and end up strolling all over the track for extended periods of time. After a while, the gear package I mentioned above starts to take it's toll on me due to the weight. I am looking at possibly utilizing the Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS to reduce the weight while retaining the focal length range. I have no concerns regarding the image quality of that lens. I know it's excellent.

What does concern me is that given it's slower speed, will it AF fast enough and accurately enough? I have no concerns on the road races as there is usually a lot of time to lock on and track the vehicles. However, on the motocross and atv tracks, the first glimpse I often have of the bikes and quads is when they suddenly appear over the top of a jump. Immediate and accurate AF is an absolute must in these circumstances. My f/2.8 lenses perform beautifully in that regard, but will the slower 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS be up to the task?

Has anyone out there had any experience they can share using this lens in a similar environment? Your input would be appreciated.

 

[Jerrad245]

I haven't been in those situations with my 70-300L but I have to say the AF speed is extremely fast, and has no problems for me tracking birds in flight. i would say you will have no problem whatsoever with it's AF speed in those environments.

 

[briansquibb]

What does concern me is that given it's slower speed, will it AF fast enough and accurately enough? I have no concerns on the road races as there is usually a lot of time to lock on and track the vehicles. However, on the motocross and atv tracks, the first glimpse I often have of the bikes and quads is when they suddenly appear over the top of a jump. Immediate and accurate AF is an absolute must in these circumstances. My f/2.8 lenses perform beautifully in that regard, but will the slower 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS be up to the task?

Not only has it got fast AF but the light weight of the lens means you can twist and turn quickly

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Last year I began photographing motorsports. I shot some super bike and GP car races on road courses and shot a lot of motocross and atv races. The gear I used was a 1D Mark IV along with my 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and 300 f/2.8L IS with great results.

I am fortunate to have full access to the motocross and atv tracks and end up strolling all over the track for extended periods of time. After a while, the gear package I mentioned above starts to take it's toll on me due to the weight. I am looking at possibly utilizing the Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS to reduce the weight while retaining the focal length range. I have no concerns regarding the image quality of that lens. I know it's excellent.

What does concern me is that given it's slower speed, will it AF fast enough and accurately enough? I have no concerns on the road races as there is usually a lot of time to lock on and track the vehicles. However, on the motocross and atv tracks, the first glimpse I often have of the bikes and quads is when they suddenly appear over the top of a jump. Immediate and accurate AF is an absolute must in these circumstances. My f/2.8 lenses perform beautifully in that regard, but will the slower 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS be up to the task?

Has anyone out there had any experience they can share using this lens in a similar environment? Your input would be appreciated.

Everything about the lens is a step down, one other thing I'd be careful of, is shutter speed. Can you get the shutter speeds you want at f/5.6 compared with your 300mm f/2.8?

Certainly, the IQ is not nearly up to that 300mm lens, nor the 70-200 either.

This is a case where I'd rent one first before making such a huge downgrade.

 

[briansquibb]

Everything about the lens is a step down, one other thing I'd be careful of, is shutter speed. Can you get the shutter speeds you want at f/5.6 compared with your 300mm f/2.8?

Certainly, the IQ is not nearly up to that 300mm lens, nor the 70-200 either.

This is a case where I'd rent one first before making such a huge downgrade.

DOF is an issue - however it is a variable apperture lens. Downgrade? mmm it has different strengths and weaknesses from the 300 f/2.8 of which the OP is trying to get away from towards a lens such as the 70-300L

IQ of the 70-300 is very,very close to that of the 70-200II in the 70-200 range - and it is a pound lighter as well which the OP sees as a benefit

 

[Harv]

I haven't been in those situations with my 70-300L but I have to say the AF speed is extremely fast, and has no problems for me tracking birds in flight. i would say you will have no problem whatsoever with it's AF speed in those environments.

Thanks for the input. I regularly shoot birds in flight also but usually there is more warning and more time to get the bird in the viewfinder than many situations with MX and ATV racing.

 

[Harv]

What does concern me is that given it's slower speed, will it AF fast enough and accurately enough? I have no concerns on the road races as there is usually a lot of time to lock on and track the vehicles. However, on the motocross and atv tracks, the first glimpse I often have of the bikes and quads is when they suddenly appear over the top of a jump. Immediate and accurate AF is an absolute must in these circumstances. My f/2.8 lenses perform beautifully in that regard, but will the slower 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS be up to the task?

Not only has it got fast AF but the light weight of the lens means you can twist and turn quickly

I can certainly use all the help I can get to twist and turn quickly. In less than two months I will be 70 years of age with lots of arthritis.

 

[Harv]

Last year I began photographing motorsports. I shot some super bike and GP car races on road courses and shot a lot of motocross and atv races. The gear I used was a 1D Mark IV along with my 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and 300 f/2.8L IS with great results.

I am fortunate to have full access to the motocross and atv tracks and end up strolling all over the track for extended periods of time. After a while, the gear package I mentioned above starts to take it's toll on me due to the weight. I am looking at possibly utilizing the Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS to reduce the weight while retaining the focal length range. I have no concerns regarding the image quality of that lens. I know it's excellent.

What does concern me is that given it's slower speed, will it AF fast enough and accurately enough? I have no concerns on the road races as there is usually a lot of time to lock on and track the vehicles. However, on the motocross and atv tracks, the first glimpse I often have of the bikes and quads is when they suddenly appear over the top of a jump. Immediate and accurate AF is an absolute must in these circumstances. My f/2.8 lenses perform beautifully in that regard, but will the slower 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS be up to the task?

Has anyone out there had any experience they can share using this lens in a similar environment? Your input would be appreciated.

Everything about the lens is a step down, one other thing I'd be careful of, is shutter speed. Can you get the shutter speeds you want at f/5.6 compared with your 300mm f/2.8?

Certainly, the IQ is not nearly up to that 300mm lens, nor the 70-200 either.

This is a case where I'd rent one first before making such a huge downgrade.

From what I can see in the online reviews, the IQ should be more than good enough. It looks like it's not far behind my 70-200 f/2.8L IS II.

Shutter speed should not be a problem. Usually there is a lot of light, shooting outdoors. Besides, I can crank the ISO on the Mark IV pretty high with excellent results.

 

[Harv]

Everything about the lens is a step down, one other thing I'd be careful of, is shutter speed. Can you get the shutter speeds you want at f/5.6 compared with your 300mm f/2.8?

Certainly, the IQ is not nearly up to that 300mm lens, nor the 70-200 either.

This is a case where I'd rent one first before making such a huge downgrade.

DOF is an issue - however it is a variable apperture lens. Downgrade? mmm it has different strengths and weaknesses from the 300 f/2.8 of which the OP is trying to get away from towards a lens such as the 70-300L

IQ of the 70-300 is very,very close to that of the 70-200II in the 70-200 range - and it is a pound lighter as well which the OP sees as a benefit

Exactly. Plus the benefit of leaving the 300/2.8 in the bag.

 

[Halfrack]

You're thinking about this too hard - find a young assistant who will pack around the 300 2.8 in exchange for track access and advice.

Either that or find a rolling tool chest that you can store & lock your lenses but also use as a place to brace and sit comfortably.

 

[briansquibb]

Here is a sample with the 1D4 and 70-300L.

Here is the full sized, unsharpened with exif

http://www.squibb.org.uk/pictures/B09G0782.JPG

Camera Model: Canon EOS-1D Mark IV
Image Date: 2012-01-27 14:47:24 (no TZ)
Focal Length: 70.0mm
Aperture: f/4.0
Exposure Time: 0.0050 s (1/200)
ISO equiv: 500

 

[Marsu42]

Here is a sample with the 1D4 and 70-300L.

Thanks for the sample! Good exposure in spite of opposite lighting and not using a flash. Using raw would have reduced the blown highlights a bit I guess. Since I don't know full frame or the 1D, I am wondering...

* the squirrel is a little blurred at 100%. I guess it is because IS tricked into believing because the background doesn't move you can use 1/200s+low iso and the little critter will freeze, too ? In this case, I don't think the lens lacks sharpness because the for on the leg farthest away is sharper.

* you're saying that the jpeg is plain out-of-camera but the fur looks somewhat over-sharpened to me - is this because of the jpeg compression (which resembles sharpness sometimes) or some setting on the 1D4?

 

[briansquibb]

Here is a sample with the 1D4 and 70-300L.

Thanks for the sample! Good exposure in spite of opposite lighting and not using a flash. Using raw would have reduced the blown highlights a bit I guess. Since I don't know full frame or the 1D, I am wondering...

* the squirrel is a little blurred at 100%. I guess it is because IS tricked into believing because the background doesn't move you can use 1/200s+low iso and the little critter will freeze, too ? In this case, I don't think the lens lacks sharpness because the for on the leg farthest away is sharper.


* you're saying that the jpeg is plain out-of-camera but the fur looks somewhat over-sharpened to me - is this because of the jpeg compression (which resembles sharpness sometimes) or some setting on the 1D4?

- the little thing is moving so it is motion blur

- the fur on these squirrels always looks over sharpened with the grey flecks - with the back lighting from the sun this gives to much contrast - and too much contrast also gives the same effect as too much sharpening

The image is cropped down to about 7mps

This picture looks much better printed than on the screen.

 

[briansquibb]

I dont have many action samples with the 1d4 + 70-300L - here is perhaps a better one from the 1ds3 + 70-300L

This was being displayed - flying from the shade into sunlight

http://www.squibb.org.uk/pictures/IMG_1971.JPG

 

[Tijn]

As your question is really about AF:

Keep in mind that the 70-300 f/4-5.6 will not make use of the increased sensitivity f/2.8 center AF point. That means that the 70-300 f/4-5.6 will probably be a slight downgrade from a 70-200 f/2.8 mk2 AF-wise (and also from the prime, if its AF is as good as the 70-200 f/2.8's - I've not read much about it, it's way out of my reach). However, the 70-300 f/4-5.6 AF is still said to be quite good.

For the level of performance that you require from the AF, I would think that the only way to check if it is really up to YOUR needs, is to rent one and test it in your kind of situations. Users showing single easy-AF or even difficult-AF shots that ended up great on a forum like this, is no way to answer your question. You want the first image bang on with AF, preferably all the time, and I'm not sure if the lens will do that as well as the 70-200 f/2.8 II does.

As said, IQ-wise it's theoretically a very slight downgrade, but probably not noticable unless you know beforehand which is which. The thing you will notice is the DOF if you were shooting wide-open.

 

[briansquibb]

As your question is really about AF:

Keep in mind that the 70-300 f/4-5.6 will not make use of the increased sensitivity f/2.8 center AF point. That means that the 70-300 f/4-5.6 will probably be a slight downgrade from a 70-200 f/2.8 mk2 AF-wise (and also from the prime, if its AF is as good as the 70-200 f/2.8's - I've not read much about it, it's way out of my reach). However, the 70-300 f/4-5.6 AF is still said to be quite good.

For the level of performance that you require from the AF, I would think that the only way to check if it is really up to YOUR needs, is to rent one and test it in your kind of situations. Users showing single easy-AF or even difficult-AF shots that ended up great on a forum like this, is no way to answer your question. You want the first image bang on with AF, preferably all the time, and I'm not sure if the lens will do that as well as the 70-200 f/2.8 II does.

I believe the OP has a 1D4 so:

Maximum f/stop: Up to f/2.8
With the 39 AF points indicated by , high-precision, cross-type AF (both horizontal- and vertical-line sensitive) is possible during manual AF point selection.

During automatic AF point selection, the number of cross-type AF points will decrease from 39 points to 19 points. The remaining 26 AF points will be horizontal-line sensitive.

Maximum f/stop: f/4
High-precision, cross-type AF with the center AF point is possible. The
remaining 44 AF points will be horizontal-line sensitive only.

Maximum f/stop: f/5.6 or f/8

With f/5.6 lenses, all the AF points will be horizontal-line sensitive only.
With f/8 lenses, AF will be possible with the center AF point being horizontal-line sensitive only. AF will not work with the other AF points.

The question is - does the 70-300 show as an F/4 or not?

 

[Marsu42]

I believe the OP has a 1D4 so

Where did you get the information about the af point performance, I'd like to know about the 60D? The manual ?

The question is - does the 70-300 show as an F/4 or not?

Are you asking if it still shows up as f4 when zoomed in and the aperture is actually f4.5-5.6?

Keep in mind that the 70-300 f/4-5.6 will not make use of the increased sensitivity f/2.8 center AF point.

Thanks for the information about how valuable 2.8 really is - if anyone else could join in I'd be obliged because I nearly decided I'll get the 70-300/4-5.6 and save the 1000€ premium for the 70-200/2.8+extender combination.

Concerning af and light: good point, I nearly forgot about that. On the other hand, currently I'm shooting with an older 2.8 prime, and the 60D af is quite crappy anyway so I wonder how much worse it can get

Does anyone have any first- or second-hand comparisons how much the af performance is lowered in real world applications when switching from 2.8 to something like f4-f5.6? Tele converters like the 2x lower the af speed, but I don't know if this is the reason.

 

[briansquibb]

Would the 70-200 have enough reach?

 

[briansquibb]

Keep in mind that the 70-300 f/4-5.6 will not make use of the increased sensitivity f/2.8 center AF point.

Thanks for your information about how valuable 2.8 really is - if anyone else could join in I'd be obliged because I nearly decided I'll get the 70-300/4-5.6 and save the 1000€ premium for the 70-200/2.8+extender combination.

Concerning af and light: good point, I nearly forgot about that. On the other hand, currently I'm shooting with an older 2.8 prime, and the 60D af is quite crappy anyway so I wonder how much worse it can get

Does anyone have any first- or second-hand comparisons how much the af performance is really lowered when switching from 2.8 to something like f4-f5.6? Tele converters like the 2x lower the af speed, but I don't know if this is the reason.

I can only relate to series 1 AF so that rules out help for you - but not for Harv who has the 1d4

 

[Tijn]

Thanks for the information about how valuable 2.8 really is - if anyone else could join in I'd be obliged because I nearly decided I'll get the 70-300/4-5.6 and save the 1000€ premium for the 70-200/2.8+extender combination.

When using a 1.4x extender on the 70-200 f/2.8, it will effectively become 98-280 f/4 and so that combination will also not benefit from the f/2.8 focus points (but it will still benefit from all the f/4 crosstype points, which the 70-300 would not).
Keep in mind though: the 70-300 AF is still "stellar", even with its relatively small apertures. When saying that the 70-300 is a downgrade AF wise, I'm primarily speaking in comparison to f/2.8 lenses (without extenders). Using an extender slows both aperture and AF, so the 70-200 would be much closer to the 70-300 in performance. But the 70-200 f/2.8 is still a more versatile lens, as it can be used without an extender in closer-distance situations with its increased f/2.8 focus ability, with the reduced DOF also being suitable for portraits and whatnot.

If you're considering the 70-300 vs 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x extenter, I really wouldn't know which is better AF-wise.