Canon Tele lenses vs Nikon tele lenses ( both with converters )

[jrista]

Luckily we have ankorwatt to correct Nikon's statements

Mmm, yes...such an extremely lucky happenstance...

Thanks for the analysis! I do wish Nikon would use thinner lines in their MTF charts. The thick bold lines make it difficult to tell exactly where the MTF plot lines lie relative to Canon's...Canon uses much thinner lines these days as the MTFs are all stacking up on 1.0, which makes it easier to see exactly how close to 1.0 the MTF approaches.

 

[Skulker]

Luckily we have ankorwatt to correct Nikon's statements

Mmm, yes...such an extremely lucky happenstance...

And we are so lucky that he has time to correct us as well.

 

[RMC33]

Luckily we have ankorwatt to correct Nikon's statements

Mmm, yes...such an extremely lucky happenstance...

And we are so lucky that he has time to correct us as well.

Ya, Seems very reminiscent of other threads...

 

[Skulker]

Yes the 300/2.8mk2 from canon looks very good in the MTF lab and Hasselblads measurements

and much more importantly it works well when you use it to take real photographs. :

Had a good time with mine today. 8)

 

[Apop]

Yes the 300/2.8mk2 from canon looks very good in the MTF lab and Hasselblads measurements

and much more importantly it works well when you use it to take real photographs. :

Had a good time with mine today. 8)

Do you use it with the 2x converter at times?

Also im close to ordering the 500 lens foot to put on the 300 for comfort!, i hope that it will fit....
Since the 500 comes with both a small and big foot , and the small one looks identical to the 300 foot I am kinda anticipating it will!

Will provide a bit more comfort for handholding with my hands

 

[Skulker]

Yes the 300/2.8mk2 from canon looks very good in the MTF lab and Hasselblads measurements

and much more importantly it works well when you use it to take real photographs. :

Had a good time with mine today. 8)

Do you use it with the 2x converter at times?

Also im close to ordering the 500 lens foot to put on the 300 for comfort!, i hope that it will fit....
Since the 500 comes with both a small and big foot , and the small one looks identical to the 300 foot I am kinda anticipating it will!

Will provide a bit more comfort for handholding with my hands

I use the 2x TC MKIII and find it very good indeed, that's what I was using today.

 

[jrista]

Yes the 300/2.8mk2 from canon looks very good in the MTF lab and Hasselblads measurements

and much more importantly it works well when you use it to take real photographs. :

Had a good time with mine today. 8)

Do you use it with the 2x converter at times?

Also im close to ordering the 500 lens foot to put on the 300 for comfort!, i hope that it will fit....
Since the 500 comes with both a small and big foot , and the small one looks identical to the 300 foot I am kinda anticipating it will!

Will provide a bit more comfort for handholding with my hands

I've used the 2x TC with the EF 300mm f/2.8 L II, and the IQ is phenomenal. Even with the 2x TC, it is still one of the sharpest lenses on earth. Sharper than my 100-400mm at is BEST, by a long shot. Background blur is also dependent upon the ENTRANCE pupil, so even with a 2x TC, your background blur is effectively the same as an f/2.8 lens...so it is a fantastic combination. You really couldn't go wrong with it.

 

[ZoeEnPhos]

Yes the 300/2.8mk2 from canon looks very good in the MTF lab and Hasselblads measurements

and much more importantly it works well when you use it to take real photographs. :

Had a good time with mine today. 8)

Do you use it with the 2x converter at times?

Also im close to ordering the 500 lens foot to put on the 300 for comfort!, i hope that it will fit....
Since the 500 comes with both a small and big foot , and the small one looks identical to the 300 foot I am kinda anticipating it will!

Will provide a bit more comfort for handholding with my hands

I've used the 2x TC with the EF 300mm f/2.8 L II, and the IQ is phenomenal. Even with the 2x TC, it is still one of the sharpest lenses on earth. Sharper than my 100-400mm at is BEST, by a long shot. Background blur is also dependent upon the ENTRANCE pupil, so even with a 2x TC, your background blur is effectively the same as an f/2.8 lens...so it is a fantastic combination. You really couldn't go wrong with it.

Dear Sir,
Thank you for this posting! I really needed to hear this from someone using the EF 300mm f/2.8 L II together with the 2x TC.
I was reminded that Bryan C in TDP maybe for first time admitted that the 2x TC III from Canon together with this lens was useable.
Of course that is based in the top-notch optical quality from the lens itself because we all know that all flaws and weaknesses from the lens that is in front of the TC will be also magnified.
Thank you jrista for all your postings!
Wish you a very good weekend!
All the Best!

C

 

[Skulker]

Yes the 300/2.8mk2 from canon looks very good in the MTF lab and Hasselblads measurements

and much more importantly it works well when you use it to take real photographs. :

Had a good time with mine today. 8)

Do you use it with the 2x converter at times?

Also im close to ordering the 500 lens foot to put on the 300 for comfort!, i hope that it will fit....
Since the 500 comes with both a small and big foot , and the small one looks identical to the 300 foot I am kinda anticipating it will!

Will provide a bit more comfort for handholding with my hands

I use the 2x TC MKIII and find it very good indeed, that's what I was using today.

here is a shot taken yesterday with mkII 300 f2.8 and mkIII 2x TC. i underexposed by 1 stop that i pulled back in PP. It was overcast and raining but i was looking for a gritty look to match the wire.

 

[Apop]

Yes the 300/2.8mk2 from canon looks very good in the MTF lab and Hasselblads measurements

and much more importantly it works well when you use it to take real photographs. :

Had a good time with mine today. 8)

Do you use it with the 2x converter at times?

Also im close to ordering the 500 lens foot to put on the 300 for comfort!, i hope that it will fit....
Since the 500 comes with both a small and big foot , and the small one looks identical to the 300 foot I am kinda anticipating it will!

Will provide a bit more comfort for handholding with my hands

I use the 2x TC MKIII and find it very good indeed, that's what I was using today.

here is a shot taken yesterday with mkII 300 f2.8 and mkIII 2x TC. i underexposed by 1 stop that i pulled back in PP. It was overcast and raining but i was looking for a gritty look to match the wire.

Nice picture !, if you got any more where those came from don't hesitate to put em here

 

[Skulker]

Nice picture !, if you got any more where those came from don't hesitate to put em here

Thanks glad you liked it.

I don't use this combination every day, but I was out with it again today. Just in the last few moments of daylight some red deer were in the sun and I took this shot hand held @ 1/320 sec. The head is a crop of the main shot to show just how good this combination can be.

 

[jrista]

Yes the 300/2.8mk2 from canon looks very good in the MTF lab and Hasselblads measurements

and much more importantly it works well when you use it to take real photographs. :

Had a good time with mine today. 8)

Do you use it with the 2x converter at times?

Also im close to ordering the 500 lens foot to put on the 300 for comfort!, i hope that it will fit....
Since the 500 comes with both a small and big foot , and the small one looks identical to the 300 foot I am kinda anticipating it will!

Will provide a bit more comfort for handholding with my hands

I've used the 2x TC with the EF 300mm f/2.8 L II, and the IQ is phenomenal. Even with the 2x TC, it is still one of the sharpest lenses on earth. Sharper than my 100-400mm at is BEST, by a long shot. Background blur is also dependent upon the ENTRANCE pupil, so even with a 2x TC, your background blur is effectively the same as an f/2.8 lens...so it is a fantastic combination. You really couldn't go wrong with it.

Dear Sir,
Thank you for this posting! I really needed to hear this from someone using the EF 300mm f/2.8 L II together with the 2x TC.
I was reminded that Bryan C in TDP maybe for first time admitted that the 2x TC III from Canon together with this lens was useable.
Of course that is based in the top-notch optical quality from the lens itself because we all know that all flaws and weaknesses from the lens that is in front of the TC will be also magnified.
Thank you jrista for all your postings!
Wish you a very good weekend!
All the Best!

C

You are welcome. Glad to be of service.

To be clear, there is definitely a drop in sharpness when using either TC, however the 300/2.8 II with 2x was still sharper than my 100-400mm at f/7.1 or f/8 (the two ideal apertures). In my experience, ANY of the Canon great whites, at any aperture with or without any TC, are all sharper than pretty much any other lens in the Canon lineup, with perhaps the 70-200/2.8 II as an exception.

I had a long, hard debate about which lens to get next, between the 300/2.8 II and 600/4 II. In the end, I decided the 600/4 II offered me more for the kind of photography I do most (birds, wildlife, and some aerial stuff for model planes and air shows), than the 300mm with a teleconverter. I'll probably still pick up the 300/2.8 II, but it'll be a couple years, as I'll have to recover from the 600mm purchase this year. Regardless...whether you intend to use teleconverters or not, you really can't go wrong with any of the Great Whites.

 

[jrista]

Yes the 300/2.8mk2 from canon looks very good in the MTF lab and Hasselblads measurements

and much more importantly it works well when you use it to take real photographs. :

Had a good time with mine today. 8)

Do you use it with the 2x converter at times?

Also im close to ordering the 500 lens foot to put on the 300 for comfort!, i hope that it will fit....
Since the 500 comes with both a small and big foot , and the small one looks identical to the 300 foot I am kinda anticipating it will!

Will provide a bit more comfort for handholding with my hands

I use the 2x TC MKIII and find it very good indeed, that's what I was using today.

here is a shot taken yesterday with mkII 300 f2.8 and mkIII 2x TC. i underexposed by 1 stop that i pulled back in PP. It was overcast and raining but i was looking for a gritty look to match the wire.

I like it. The deeper contrast on the barbed wire definitely looks better.

(Note: Although I suspect you could have achieved the same thing (and with less noise) by exposing to the right, and correcting in post. Contrast of a RAW is really all about the default tone curve...fundamentally, digital sensors are nearly linear devices (there might be some slight attenuation due to the electronics). You never really lose anything with ETTR in a digital camera, and you'll always improve your SNR (and thus, reduce noise.) Think of a raw image more as a digital signal than as an image...it is very fluid and flexible in post.)

 

[Skulker]

I like it. The deeper contrast on the barbed wire definitely looks better.

(Note: Although I suspect you could have achieved the same thing (and with less noise) by exposing to the right, and correcting in post. Contrast of a RAW is really all about the default tone curve...fundamentally, digital sensors are nearly linear devices (there might be some slight attenuation due to the electronics). You never really lose anything with ETTR in a digital camera, and you'll always improve your SNR (and thus, reduce noise.) Think of a raw image more as a digital signal than as an image...it is very fluid and flexible in post.)

Glad you liked it, thanks.

I probably didn't make it clear, the original under exposure was not intentional. (were has the little embarrassed face gone when you need it) (I had not reset the camera from the shot before) I choose that shot over others almost identical with more exposure because I liked the "grain", "texture", "noise" or any name it's given. There was minimal noise reduction in PP just LR4 standard settings, if anything the bit of clarity, vibrancy and hint of sharpening all will have increased the noise. I liked the effect as I thought it added something to the image. I only mentioned it to explain why it looked like it did, not to say I couldn't get rid of the noise.

I'm happy with the expose to the right idea, though I seldom use it. Normally I'm thinking of the highlights and what I want to achieve with them and I expose as much as I can with them in mind.

Although I have a very technical background I think of my photograph as a way of producing images not photographs. I often find my most interesting shots, from my perspective, are not the most technically "correct" but ones that give a feel of the real world rather than a studio look.

 

[Apop]

I downloaded the jpg of the full picture, and when i take 100% crop it looks very impressive! and that at 1/320th

For some reason it shows a lot more detail than when looking at the displayed crop in your post , maybe compression?

Nice picture !, if you got any more where those came from don't hesitate to put em here

Thanks glad you liked it.

I don't use this combination every day, but I was out with it again today. Just in the last few moments of daylight some red deer were in the sun and I took this shot hand held @ 1/320 sec. The head is a crop of the main shot to show just how good this combination can be.

 

[garyknrd]

Those are nice with the new Nikon lens. I have been thinking of that lens for a walk around lens.

No offence. But I kinda shudder every time I see people pushing any lens with T.C's as being an alternative. I have the 300 II and I will use the 1.4x only with it. The image is sharp but it looses allot with the 1.4 connected. I won't even connect a 2x to it? Same with another II lens I own. Just me I guess.

 

[Apop]

If that is really true there might be something wrong with the lens/converter or af adjusment.
I find it very hard to spot any differences in 100% crops and the drop in AF speed difference isn't noticeble to me either

There must be a difference in AF speed an quality, no doubt ,but I think it is just very small

Those are nice with the new Nikon lens. I have been thinking of that lens for a walk around lens.

No offence. But I kinda shudder every time I see people pushing any lens with T.C's as being an alternative. I have the 300 II and I will use the 1.4x only with it. The image is sharp but it looses allot with the 1.4 connected. I won't even connect a 2x to it? Same with another II lens I own. Just me I guess.

 

[garyknrd]

Where mine really impress me is the flat sharp field. The two I have are amazing. A good flat sharp field with little or no distortion. Which is very important to me. Close quarter shooting makes the lenses a perfect match for me. Bare lens my 300 is so sharp it is amazing. Shooting with it everyday I can immediately see the quality drop when I put on my 1.4. Not only that with the 1.4 on a bigger lens it slows me down to a crawl. Af speed, Long lens technique has to kick in to get sharp shots. Just not fun for me. The 1.4 on the 300 I find acceptable. It is light and IS does a good job. The 2X is strictly a no go zone for me with either lens.

Kinda curious about the new 200-400. Looking at the MTF charts. I personally do not think I would buy one. For me that is. Again, not for most I guess.

That is just me. It looks like it is not for most. So no sweat.. But that is the way mine work, and the way I like to use them for my style of shooting.