70-300L for Outdoors?

[unfocused]

I just want to comment on the IS of this lens. It is fantastic.

A few months ago, I needed to shoot a presentation in a very very poorly lit school library. I found that by bracing myself carefully and waiting for the speakers to pause, I could get usable shots even going down to about 1/8th to 1/15th of a second.

More and more, when I'm packing to go shoot outdoors, I'll put the 15-85 on my 7D, pack this lens in my bag and leave everything else at home.

 

[papa-razzi]

I have the 70-300L and use it almost exclusively for outdoor sports - football, soccer, cross country and track.

I use it with a 7D. My exeperience - AF is excellent, rarely misses, very sharp lens, IQ is great, the reach & range is perfect, and it is light enough to hand hold easily. For what I use it for, this "relatively" affordable lens is perfect.

I also have a 70-200 f/2.8 IS (M1). The AF can't keep up with the 70-300L - I stopped using it for outdoor sports in favor of the 70-300L, even with lower light situations (cloudy or dusk). I'd rather use a higher ISO and get in-focus shots than a lower ISO with a lot of misses.

 

[alan_k]

I have a 60D, and use the 70-300L quite a bit. It is a really great lens given the size/weight. The AF is fast, IS is fantastic. I think the IS makes up a bit for not being as fast as an f/4 or f/2.8, although you miss the control over depth of field, and fast moving sports could be a bit of a problem. Most of my use is with distant wildlife where that isn't as much of a concern. If you are a lot closer to your subjects you might opt for one of the 70-200s.

I bought the kenko 1.4x 300 Pro teleconverter, and I don't think this is a worthwhile purchase (in my case). I did some informal tests and in my experience cropping a bit more on a photo w/o the converter leads to similar IQ as a photo with the kenko on. I think the only advantage might be in very small subjects that would be missed by the AF at 300mm but would be caught by the AF with the extra magnification.

I did get a 3rd party tripod collar and if you plan to use this on a tripod at all I think it's a good purchase. It's pretty frustrating to frame a shot on a ball-head when you have something so front-heavy. You certainly don't need a tripod though- this lens is very hand-holdable.

Getting a grip for your camera will make the balance a lot better, gives you added battery life, controls for vertical shooting, and makes you look cool! 8)


Male Greater Sage-grouse in flight by alankrakauer, on Flickr


super_moon1_50 108 by alankrakauer, on Flickr


glacier_deer 208 by alankrakauer, on Flickr

 

[Marsu42]

I bought the kenko 1.4x 300 Pro teleconverter, and I don't think this is a worthwhile purchase (in my case). I did some informal tests and in my experience cropping a bit more on a photo w/o the converter leads to similar IQ as a photo with the kenko on.

Are you sure you've got a good copy of the tc and the lens? Everything I've read including my own experience with this combination is that it's better than cropping (though how large the margin is is subjective, I didn't shoot charts).

I think the only advantage might be in very small subjects that would be missed by the AF at 300mm but would be caught by the AF with the extra magnification.

Again, my experience is different - af is more tiresome with the tc on esp. in single point af mode since the af often hunts @f8, esp. in dim light or bad contrast.

 

[alan_k]

I've certainly had no cause to suspect the lens, so it is possible I have a bad or mis-matched TC. To be honest I just used it a few times, wasn't terribly happy with it, and haven't gone back to it. All I can go by is my experience with this one model.

The AF is definitely slower with the TC, but it's not impossible to use. I felt like this was a case where a focus limiter would be handy, as the slowness was compounded by missing focus a little more often, and having to rack through the range. Even so, I was able to hand-hold 300mm in fairly low light and get ok results.

A bit more perspective, my 70-300L was an upgrade from the older version of the 70-300 IS (non-L). This was the first L lens I had. Perhaps if you already have a stable full of L lenses your perspective might be different, but I think this lens is the bees knees.