300mm (prime) world

[karusel]

There are a few qualitychoices:
EF 300mm f/4L USM (discontinued)
EF 300mm f/4L IS USM --- $ 1,149.95

EF 300mm f/2.8L USM (discontinued)
EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM --- $ 3,899.95
Tokina AF 300mm f/2.8 AT-X 300AF Pro IRF --- $ 2,299.95
Tamron 300mm f/2.8 LD IF --- $ 2,999.00
Sigma 300mm F2.8 EX APO HSM --- ~$2,299.99

Added to that, a zoom, which is said to be equal to or sharper than the prime:
Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX APO HSM --- $ 2,399.00


Personally, I don't want to spend a fortune, but I still want top performance, so I'm a typical modern day consumer. I don't fancy relatively small apertures, so I wouldn't go with the f/4, but the price is right at that one.

There is no doubt, that Canon's 300L is the best lense in its class for Canon EF mount. Notice how I didn't say it's the best 300mm lense in the world? Anyhow, it's best, but twice-the-pile-of-money best? I would like to know how others compare to it, so if there are any owners of Tokina, Sigma or Tamron 300mm's opinions would be greatly appreciated. Others interested in 300mm glass are also welcome to join in. ;)

[DwightMcCann]

Well, I'm interested! I am in the position to build my Canon compatible lens system with the best there is. I have the 16-35mm, 24-70mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 IS L and TC1.4 and 2.0. I had planned to add the 300mm f2.8 IS L but someone suggested that it didn't measure up to the f4. I would very much like to have that extra f-stop but not at the expense of image quality or lens responsiveness.

[DocFrankenstein]

Tough choices of the "typical modern day consumer" :lol:

[Belmondo]

There are more than a few people who consider the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS one of Canon's sharpest lenses. I own one and have had very good luck with it. It's very sharp.

The real beauty of it, however, is how well it works with the Canon TCs. Both the 1.4X and 2X converters work seamlessly with the 2.8.

I have both the 300 f/2.8L IS and the 500 f/4L IS, and if I only have room for one, I'll grab the 300.

[DwightMcCann]

Belmondo, THANKS! That's just what I wanted to hear. I have both TC's, love the way they work with the 70-200mm f2.8 IS L. I also have the 500mm f4 on my list, so your message is a double win for me. Just a couple a more shoots at the casino and I'll order the 300mm! :-) I just donated via Paypal ... I have gotten way more than my money's worth here.

[clicky]

Here's a shot taken with EF 300 mm f/2.8 IS, just showing it's capabilities combined with 1D II/ISO 3200 and only available streetlight... (old tread)

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=63169

[pcasciola]

If you want to see how good the 300/2.8L IS is with the extenders, check out this thread posted by KennyG. The first shot was with the 2x extender, the second is with the 1.4x entender, and the third is with no extender.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=69549

I have the 300/4L IS because it's all I can afford right now, but I'd like to upgrade to the 300/2.8L or 400/2.8L at some point.

That Sigma 120-300 is also high on my wish list. If that had OS I'd buy it tomorrow. With a 1.4x it's about a 170-420mm f/4, and with a 2x it's an autofocusing 240-600mm f/5.6. Now that's pretty cool.

[CyberDyneSystems]

The Canon f/2.8 IS is as mentioned the top dog..
One of Canon's best lenses period,. sharpest and fastest focusing.
It is just the best 300mm you can put on your camera.

I'd scratch the Tokina and Tamron right off your list.. only the Sigma can compare without looking a fool next to the Canon. The Sigma is a favorite amongst Nikon shooters looking t save a few $$ of=ver the Nikon equivelent.. and since the Nikon version lacked the "VR" for so long.. it has allways compared agaisnt the Nikon better than against the Canon.
Of the third party lenses only the Sigma has a focus speed that is any way acceptable for sports. No IS though.

"IF" you can find it used (you can't ) in a Canon mount it should be a terrific bargain.. I wouldn't pay over $1,600.00 for it.

And the Sigma Zoom is a small miracle as well.. offering 120-300mm at near "L" Prime quality.. Again no IS

[Belmondo]

I have the 300/4L IS because it's all I can afford right now.

You're not suffering, Phil. That's a very fine lens, too. I won't mention any names, but I sold mine to a forum member whose shots with it have garnered a lot of Oohs and Ahs. I'm a little sorry I sold it now. :lol:

[Tom W]

Indeed, the 300/4 is a fine lens. And it works well with both the 1.4X and 2X teleconverters.

Here's a 600 mm shot (300/4 + 2X TC), handheld with IS (well, kneeling, with my elbow firmly planted on my left knee to stabilize myself plus IS):

http://www.pbase.com/photosbytom/image/42691019

Click on the link and click on "original". The shot has some decent detail.

[Belmondo]

Indeed, the 300/4 is a fine lens. And it works well with both the 1.4X and 2X teleconverters.

Here's a 600 mm shot (300/4 + 2X TC), handheld with IS (well, kneeling, with my elbow firmly planted on my left knee to stabilize myself plus IS):


You can get on one knee?

And you can get back up?

:shock:

I've forgotten what that's like.

[Tom W]

You can get on one knee?

And you can get back up?

:shock:

I've forgotten what that's like.

I'm still stuck there - with my laptop! :)

[Bosscat]

Indeed, the 300/4 is a fine lens. And it works well with both the 1.4X and 2X teleconverters.

Here's a 600 mm shot (300/4 + 2X TC), handheld with IS (well, kneeling, with my elbow firmly planted on my left knee to stabilize myself plus IS):

http://www.pbase.com/photosbytom/image/42691019

Click on the link and click on "original". The shot has some decent detail.

Think you may have just sold me on adding the 300/4 to my must have list with that shot.

[KennyG]

The Canon 300 2.8L IS is rated as their fastest AF lens and by everyone that owns it, the best current lens that Canon make. Faultless with a 1.4 TC and with a 2.0 TC only the 600 Canon beats it.

[DavidEB]

I am a happy new owner of a 300 f4. what a fine lens. here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=94476) is a thread with some of my first shots.

The 300 f2.8 may well be a better lens, I don't know, but it's surely bigger and heavier. I could walk all day with the 300 f4 and not break a sweat. It's lighter than my 70-200 f2.8.

[Cadwell]

If you want 300mm with f/2.8 and the convenience of a zoom then the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 is the only game in town. The fact that it's optics are startlingly good is also useful.

If I was in the market for a 300mm prime then I'd go for one of the two Canons. I have friends who shoot motorsport with the f/2.8 and the f/4. Both get extremely nice results. I can't recal ever seeing a Tokina, Tamron or Sigma 300mm prime in use at a race track... certainly never on the "pro" side of the fence.

Personally (and I know others work differently) I only consider a prime viable for what I do if I have two bodies available to me. I've found I've missed too many shots by having the "wrong" lens on. Nowadays I shoot with a prime (500mm) on one camera and a zoom (120-300mm f/2.8 or 100-400L depending on how I feel) on the other.