Lens dilemma- 300mm f2.8 with tc or 500mm f4L MkI

[Jack Douglas]

Well, all I can say is that Canon should be sued for psychological abuse of its dedicated customers. We want MPs and fps with today's AF in a 1 series body that's lighter.

My house of cards will topple if 400 DO II X2 III doesn't turn out great with the 1DX II because I've reasoned that 800 mm will balance what I'd have gotten with 30 MPs relative to having previously been stuck at 600. So for me personally based on thousands of shots, 800mm FF should solve my excess cropping issues. Of course I'm now at F8, but with 1DX II ISO capability. I exclude weight because I can handle the 400 plus 1DX II. Like Alan I could not handle the 500. Then, how does one put a value on a feature such as the red focus points which I just love, and 14 fps.

It reminds me of debates about the 300 that only focused on IQ. What about that beautifully smooth tripod mount ring with detentes. Compare it to the 70-200 F2.8 II for example when you're trying to quickly shift from landscape to portrait on a tripod and the bird is about to disappear.

Jack

 

[jmeyer]

Hi, I have the 7D mkII and the 500 F4. It is an unbelievable combo. It is extremely sharp, with fast AF, even with the extender on. I always have the 1.4xIII attached to it and a lot of times I wish I would have more length. I mostly shoot birds, but do wildlife with it as well. I also have the battery grip on the 7D. This combo is quite heavy and I almost always have it on a tripod. Carrying it around all day is tough and usually leaves my shoulders sore. I have also hand held it for a day and that really puts a drain on your arms and shoulders, too. I have never used the 300 or the new 100-400, but I upgraded from the 400 5.6. With the 1.4xIII on that lens, I never really liked the quality plus being at f8, isn't the greatest. If you choose to go with the 500, you will be extremely happy, I sure am.

Jeremy

If you want to see how good this combo is, feel free to look at some of my pictures on Flickr.

https://flickr.com/photos/20birds08/

 

[Jack Douglas]

Hi, I have the 7D mkII and the 500 F4. It is an unbelievable combo. It is extremely sharp, with fast AF, even with the extender on. I always have the 1.4xIII attached to it and a lot of times I wish I would have more length. I mostly shoot birds, but do wildlife with it as well. I also have the battery grip on the 7D. This combo is quite heavy and I almost always have it on a tripod. Carrying it around all day is tough and usually leaves my shoulders sore. I have also hand held it for a day and that really puts a drain on your arms and shoulders, too. I have never used the 300 or the new 100-400, but I upgraded from the 400 5.6. With the 1.4xIII on that lens, I never really liked the quality plus being at f8, isn't the greatest. If you choose to go with the 500, you will be extremely happy, I sure am.

Jeremy

If you want to see how good this combo is, feel free to look at some of my pictures on Flickr.

https://flickr.com/photos/20birds08/

Jeremy, lovely photos!

Jack

 

[Mikehit]

Well, I've gone and done it now!
I went straight down the middle and bought the 400DO II. An out-and-out luxury but Black Friday came along and someone was offering £1,000 off the new price which brought it into the 'it's not too much more' territory compared to the 300mm.

 

[AlanF]

Well, I've gone and done it now!
I went straight down the middle and bought the 400DO II. An out-and-out luxury but Black Friday came along and someone was offering £1,000 off the new price which brought it into the 'it's not too much more' territory compared to the 300mm.

You won't regret it - I love my one (which I bought also for £1000 discount from my favourite shop). Paired with the 2xTC and the 5DIV, it's a dream, focussing on all points at f/8 for BIF.

 

[tron]

Happy shooting Mike. I haven't test it with 5D4 but I have used it with 7D2 and it is super sharp and versatile.

 

[Grant Atkinson]

Well, I've gone and done it now!
I went straight down the middle and bought the 400DO II. An out-and-out luxury but Black Friday came along and someone was offering £1,000 off the new price which brought it into the 'it's not too much more' territory compared to the 300mm.

I agree with AlanF here, Mike, you wont regret it. We also just bought the EF 400DO IS ii and it is helping me get some of my better quality bird-in-flight captures ever, used as a bare lens, and then working almost as well with a 1.4x iii extender in place. Cannot beat that light weight and compact form, combining to make it a lens I am excited to pick up and use

 

[Jack Douglas]

Happy shooting Mike. I haven't test it with 5D4 but I have used it with 7D2 and it is super sharp and versatile.

Now the camera! Congrats.

Jack

 

[Mikehit]

The camera....the 1Dx2 is now out of my reach so once I have pushed this combo as far as I can I will be looking at either a second hand 1Dx (original) or 5DIV.
The 6D may be sold on and I hold onto the 7D2 for high-MP stuff.

 

[AlanF]

Don't expect the bare lens to be significantly better at 400mm than the 100-400mm II, as I find with my lenses and also TDP and lensrentals with theirs.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=962&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/08/the-sort-of-great-400mm-shootout/

The 100-400mm II is that good. The DO is an extra stop wider. But, the DO comes into its own with the 1.4x and 2xTC. Mine has the 2xTC virtually welded on until it gets dark.

 

[Mikehit]

Oi!! I am trying to avoid buyer's remorse !!! ;D

I am still amazed at the quality the zoom gives in good conditions and have done plenty of thinking on this. The f4 is definitely a bonus for low light (in sunny Manchester!) and the option of going to 560/800mm are certainly the attractive points.

 

[Ozarker]

Hi Mike,

Assuming you have the 70-200mm covered, why not sell the 100-400mm and get the 400mm f/5.6L... save a little more and get the 500mm f/4L.

Weird, but might work. :-\

 

[AlanF]

Hi Mike,

Assuming you have the 70-200mm covered, why not sell the 100-400mm and get the 400mm f/4.6L... save a little more and get the 500mm f/4L.

Weird, but might work. :-\

Read today's posts - he has just bought the 400mm f/4 DO II.

 

[JPAZ]

1) Your photos are really great (love the eyes on the loon)!

2) Congrats on your new lens. Use it well.

3) FWIW, since getting the 100-400 mkii, my 300 f/2.8ii has not been out of its case. I was so fortunate to get the 300 and it is clearly optically best lens I own but the 100-400 ii is that good that the 300 (with or without TC's) rarely comes to mind. I am just not ready to part with it for all the reasons that others have stated.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Oi!! I am trying to avoid buyer's remorse !!! ;D

I am still amazed at the quality the zoom gives in good conditions and have done plenty of thinking on this. The f4 is definitely a bonus for low light (in sunny Manchester!) and the option of going to 560/800mm are certainly the attractive points.

Hey Mike, I wouldn't have considered buying the 400 if it wasn't for 800mm. That was after 3 years of feeling 600mm was on the edge for the little birdies that I was typically photographing otherwise I had serious thoughts about how handy the 100-400 would be. However, I reminded myself that my 70-200 can still do a decent job in the sub 400 range.

I wouldn't consider a 1DX over a 5D4 as a 400 DO II owner unless FPS was really important.

Jack

 

[Ozarker]

Hi Mike,

Assuming you have the 70-200mm covered, why not sell the 100-400mm and get the 400mm f/4.6L... save a little more and get the 500mm f/4L.

Weird, but might work. :-\

Read today's posts - he has just bought the 400mm f/4 DO II.

Oh well.

 

[hendrik-sg]

300 2.8 on crop are moreless the same as 500 4.0 on FF, 1 stop aperture against 1 stop of ISO tolerance.

I had a 300 2.8 i with a 2x on crop for really much reach, with lesser light i could reduce the extender later switch to the 5d2.

complementing i had a 70-200 f4 is, which i used on the 5d when the 300 was on crop.

i sold both and replaced them by a 100-400 ii. The better IS compensated for the 2.8 (4.0 at comparable reach) opening by far, but with a crop camera the 100-400 is at it's limits, usage of the 1.4x gives almost no benefit.

i could compare against a loaned 500 ii which takes well both extender, means gives 2.5x more usable reach.

so my conclusion is:

- If i carry a supertele anywhere, it would be a vii one, for the weight and better IS, maybe as a compromise sell the 100-400. Then why not the 500ii
- FF gives the most, the first "extender"should be a crop camera with f8 capability (7dii or 80d)
- maybe combine it with a cheaper and lighter telezoom, the new 70-300 or the 70-200 4.0is

 

[SteveM]

I have 2 Deer parks close to where I live, so I predominantly shoot Deer. I have a 300mm f2.8 along with a 1.4 converter on a crop sensor body. The 300 and the 1.4 tc are the ideal length on a crop sensor, I never remove the 1.4. Just can't get near enough with the 300 on its own. The extra weight and size would put me off a 500, having said that, the 500 f4 appears to be the standard lens for professional wildlife photographers.
Were I shooting full frame I would have bought the 500 f4. I do have a 5D Mklll, I just don't use it for wildlife unless I want a more 'environmental' picture.
I do find myself increasingly using the 100-400 mkll for its light weight, but I also like the 'creamier' backgrounds the 300 and 1.4 give me.

 

[Mikehit]

As the title of the thread says, the 300 was my initial thinking but once I thought about the amount of time I would have the 1.4tc attached, I thought I may as well go for the 400mm.

 

[Jack Douglas]

As the title of the thread says, the 300 was my initial thinking but once I thought about the amount of time I would have the 1.4tc attached, I thought I may as well go for the 400mm.

Obviously, what we are hearing here is the need relative to subject size. In the beginning of my journey as a more elderly person the 400 2.8 would have been high on my list over the 300 if not for weight, and there was no stellar 400 DO II. If a 500 II would have been available for really cheap I'd have moved on it but oh me oh my, for me the 400 DO is now the max I want to hike with and in a few short years I'll likely be saying the 100-400 with crop is the way to go for birds, if I'm still hiking. Why do lenses have to be so heavy! In all cases the differences are pretty minimal but I think we the CR posters are pretty fussy about the quality of our shots (excluding Alan, who's just "particular"). ;D

Mike, I'll go out on a limb and suggest you won't have any buyers remorse unless you tire of the weight and/or crave zoom.

Jack