Canon 300mm f/4 IS ... Worth the Buy?

[StealthLude]

I find myself on a tele search and keep comming back to this lens...

I dont really want to compare the lens to a 100-400 or the 400mm 5.6....

But I do plan on using the 300mm f/4 IS with a 1.4x TC.

I read mixed reviews stating the 300mm with 1.4x TC is AMAZING and some even prefer it over the 100-400 lens.... And vise versa.

Is this lens worth the money? My local shops dont have this lens in stock or for rental... So I cant get a hands on preview...

Can anyone post some picts of this lens with and w/o the 1.4x TC.

Im seeing a lot of 300mm f/4 IS shots with and w/o a TC that look amazing on some of the review sites, very promising... but I wanted to hear it from my trusted POTN members.

I rented the 100-400 this weekend was while it was very fun to use, pictures came out pretty good when I had some decent shutter speeds, the push pull isnt for me.

I found myself around the 300-400mm range and I have a 70-200 as well. I figure the 300mm f/4 with TC is going to be my best choice.

IQ is the name of the game today. What do you guys think.

[cjm]

I have this combo and it is amazing! I chose it over the 100-400 lens.

[EOS_JD]

I use both my 70-200 and the 300 f4 with the C and get nice results. Not sure if it beats the 100-400 but it comes close.

JD

[StealthLude]

I use both my 70-200 and the 300 f4 with the C and get nice results. Not sure if it beats the 100-400 but it comes close.

JD

Close is good enough, Since the 100-400 isn’t f/4 @ 300mm....

How does the 300mm f/4 IS (w/o TC) compare to the 100-400 @ 300mm. I assume its sharper, and displays characteristics of a prime lens? After getting the 100mm Macro I then knew what sharp was... now im trying to find a tele that gives me the same.

Thanks

Any picts guys or gals?

Another thing I have not tested or really researched is the AF speed...

I do want to use this lens for birding, sports, and nature... Hope the AF is fast and accurate as well? Faster than the 100-400 perhaps?

[Lani Kai]

I'd check the archive thread if you haven't already done so; it's full of pictures, many with a 1.4x

[Dorman]

It sounds to me like you've really thought this through and it'd fit your needs well. I don't think the IQ or AF would disappoint, I've seen some awfully good looking shots with and without TC. Since you have the 70-200 and aren't really looking to cover from 100mm up to 400mm, then I'd say the prime is for you buddy.

[ed rader]

5d + 300L f4 IS wide open with 1.4 TC, iso 1250:

http://www.fototime.com/11FEB3A2A39DADB/orig.jpg

5d + 300L f4 IS wide open, iso 200:

http://www.fototime.com/6C803E88B74C504/orig.jpg

[ed rader]

It sounds to me like you've really thought this through and it'd fit your needs well. I don't think the IQ or AF would disappoint, I've seen some awfully good looking shots with and without TC. Since you have the 70-200 and aren't really looking to cover from 100mm up to 400mm, then I'd say the prime is for you buddy.

i agree. that was my reasoning when i bought the prime. also, the prime is fairly light and compact and fits well in my camera bag.

ed rader

[EORI]

i agree. that was my reasoning when i bought the prime. also, the prime is fairly light and compact and fits well in my camera bag. ed rader

How does it compare size and weight -wise to the 70-200 2.8IS?

[mrclark321]

I had it and did not like it. You already have the 70-200 and 100mm is not that much more.
I personally would be going with the 400 prime or the 100-400

[ed rader]

How does it compare size and weight -wise to the 70-200 2.8IS?

looks like about a pound lighter but an inch longer. the built-on hood is also very compact.

ed rader

[Fade2]

First thing come spring this lens will be in my bag!
Been debating and doing homework and I think (know) I gotta have it!! ;)

[George Chew]

Greetings,
I bought the 300 F4L IS with 420mm in mind by adding the 1.4x TC. The pair is always together. I choose this over 100-400 as I already have the 70-200. While the 400 f5.6 doesn't have IS. The IQ of 300 with 1.4xTC is very very very good. There are many pic on this forum. Go thro them and this is really a very worth while lens. Enjoy...


http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o235/walkman_photos/Birds%20and%20animals/_MG_7389.jpg

[Tareq]

I don't have this lens yet, but i can borrow it from my friend if i want or i can buy it as it is cheap, i did test with 100-400 adding 1.4x and 2x and the results was bad for crop but good little bit with no crop, but i got nice results with my 70-200 with 2x TC so i can be sure that these TC's will be good enough on primes.
I did test on my 135L with 1.4x or 2x and the results still wowing me, so i am don't have any fear to use those TC on primes (and i don't prefer to use them on zooms even they give good resluts because of AF disappeared).

[Woolburr]

I love my 300 f/4....great IQ and nice weight. It isn't quite as wonderful as the 300 f/2.8, but it is a close second at that range.

[AeroSmith]

YES!

http://aerosmith.smugmug.com/gallery/1569276

http://aerosmith.smugmug.com/gallery/1960521

[Bill Roberts]

It's a good lens. Not too large or heavy to carry around, superb IQ and with the 1.4 extender you've got 300mm or 420mm available. I considered the 100-400 zoom but for me the prime beats it hands down.

[cjm]

Here is my favorite example of the 300mm f4 IS L and a 1.4x TC. http://christophermartin.smugmug.com/gallery/2150066/1/111477117

Its so amazing! I hope Canon gives it back to me soon. :(

[ed rader]

Here is my favorite example of the 300mm f4 IS L and a 1.4x TC. http://christophermartin.smugmug.com/gallery/2150066/1/111477117

Its so amazing! I hope Canon gives it back to me soon. :(

Chris -- those are all very nice :D .

ed rader

[StealthLude]

Thanks for all the info guys, ive made the move and went onto getting this lens!

[sunbeast]

LOL......I bought this lens just before I bought the computer from you.....you'll love it!

[ed rader]

It's a good lens. Not too large or heavy to carry around, superb IQ and with the 1.4 extender you've got 300mm or 420mm available. I considered the 100-400 zoom but for me the prime beats it hands down.

hey Bill - is that a credit card in your avatar? looks like you are handing it to the clerk....or your wife :D !

ed rader

[gasrocks]

Do not forget the macro capabilities of the 300/4 L IS.

[Bill Roberts]

hey Bill - is that a credit card in your avatar? looks like you are handing it to the clerk....or your wife :D !

ed rader

Hell no Ed... the credit card melted shortly after I joined POTN:lol: :lol:
Actually it's one of the pocket sized whibal cards, but you knew that anyway!

cheers
Bill

[bildeb0rg]

Hell no Ed... the credit card melted shortly after I joined POTN:lol: :lol:
Actually it's one of the pocket sized whibal cards, but you knew that anyway!

cheers
Bill

Read about those somewhere, do you have a link? Iwouldn't mind getting one.

[DavidEB]

A great lens. without the TC, the image quality is wonderful - not just sharp, but also nice colors and contrast. Excellent wide open (I didn't think that was true when I tried out a 100-400). Great for close focus, flowers, butterflies. Takes lovely outdoor portraits with totally blown out background. excellent lens for softball, soccer and surfers. Can't take a bad photo with it.

combined with the TC the image is still quite good, but the AF isn't so fast anymore. If your goal is birds at 420, you may be better off with the faster focusing 400 f5.6 If you really want great images at 300mm, and 420 is a bonus, then the 300 is for you.

[butcha27]

wow all this positive talk is more than leaning me toward getting one of these x 1.4 Tele combo. I shoot mainly sport. Usually at around the 300mm or above so it would do the job perfectly with the TC. great thread!

[MDJAK]

I'm having this question also. I believe I'm going to go with the 300 f2.8 though.

mark

[StealthLude]

I'm having this question also. I believe I'm going to go with the 300 f2.8 though.

mark


The 300mm 2.8 lens works so well with the 1.4TC its not even funny. I see little to NO IQ loss at all. Only thing I see is that you loose one stop of light and get a f/4 420mm lens.

If and when I have the money, im going to get the 300mm 2.8 + 1.4x combo and it will solve all my problems =) Ive also been looking at the 400mm DO and the 400 2.8 but all of these lenses are way out of my price range.

[StealthLude]

Another question.... Can you stack a 1.4x and a 2x TC?

[JohnJ80]

I don't think you would want to stack the TC's - that would cost you three stops of light and your AF probably won't work unless you have a 1D (and maybe marginal then). The 1.4x does well, but the 2X is not as good as the 1.4x for IQ.

I have this lens and think it is terrific with or without the TC. It gives excellent IQ in either configuration.

The only downside to the TC with this lens is that the AF goes from lightning fast to pretty slow. For example, it is not good enough for sports shooting like this on its own. If you follow the action manually focusing it can help zero it in but it is not fast enough to follow the action on its own.

J

[StealthLude]

thanks for the info. I know the AF would suffer when adding a TC, but I only need a 1.4tc for wildlife and static objects...

Only reason I wanted to ask if you can stack TC is for fun... Shooting a static object on a tripod, just for the reach...

I dont plan on buying a 2x TC, but figure it would be fun to rent one just to play with it.

300mm is my most used focal length when I use tele lenses. And when I go to the zoo or wild animal park, I would use the 1.4x to shoot animals. I dont shoot sports or action often. But I would still try birding with the TC. Hopefully AF can lock on. I got used to using the full time manual focuc to assist the lens since Ive been having to do that sometimes when I use my 100mm Macro lens.

[JohnJ80]

The AF may or may not be fast enough to lock on to a flying bird. However, you CAN manually focus with the lens very nicely - and that would work just fine. If you track the bird manually focusing are at least close, the lens is fast enough to take it the rest of the way in for a nice focus. It is not fast enough to focus when the lens is grossly out of focus on a moving subject.

J

[StealthLude]

The AF may or may not be fast enough to lock on to a flying bird. However, you CAN manually focus with the lens very nicely - and that would work just fine. If you track the bird manually focusing are at least close, the lens is fast enough to take it the rest of the way in for a nice focus. It is not fast enough to focus when the lens is grossly out of focus on a moving subject.

J


Are you talking about the lens with or without a 1.4 TC?

[Juan Zas]

The AF may or may not be fast enough to lock on to a flying bird. However, you CAN manually focus with the lens very nicely - and that would work just fine. If you track the bird manually focusing are at least close, the lens is fast enough to take it the rest of the way in for a nice focus. It is not fast enough to focus when the lens is grossly out of focus on a moving subject.

J

With a series 1 I don´t know, but with 350D is painful try to get keepers or at least well focused images, not blured, shots of birds in flight with the x1,4 TC and the EF 300 f/4 L IS, if you are not in good light conditions. The AF system is not able to follow fast enough. Finally I did manage with that after many hundreds of shoots & tests. It´s a question of a proper set-up; but still the limitations are there. That´s one of the reasons because I want to update my body.

About shooting manually tacking birds flying & follow them; sorry but I am not able to that and get good results.

BTW: EF 300 f/4 L IS + Kenko TC 1,4 works pretty good; very recommended option. I am very happy with my combo.

[Bill Roberts]

Read about those somewhere, do you have a link? Iwouldn't mind getting one.

try http://www.rawworkflow.com/products/whibal/index.html

I find it works quite well. They do different sizes but I'm more likely to actually take the smaller one with me!