Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM

Anyone got a decent moon shot with this lens? The sample below is not what I am looking for and I hope to do better someday. We had a super-large moonrise yesterday but by the time I got all the gear out it was high in the sky and quite bright. In the haste to setup I did not check the filter and I had Canon's polarizer in there the whole time. I had a 2XIII in place and all EXIF data is intact at Flickr.
Anyway, I'd love to see a sharp image taken with this lens or lens/extender combo for inspiration.
Thanks!

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/markaphoto/10​893580806/

/\ That looks all right to me. What exactly do you find wrong with it?

2slo wrote in post #16458505
Also very good. I compare these though to the set with the 500mm f/4 you also posted. The 500mm set have the edge IMHO. Assuming you processed them the same that leaves the difference of cameras...

I'd say the bodies are the difference…1Dx vs 70D. The noise levels in the 70D are quite a bit higher requiring more post NR. Definitely affects the quality. Kind of a cool test though. I would normally shoot with my 5D mk3 as second camera but wanted to see how the 70D fared. Not bad for an sixth of the price of the 1Dx!
The lenses are both awesome. I am surprised that the 500mm came out as crisp as they did with the 2X TCIII. When I first got the lens I didn't have the same results. Must mean I've learned how to handle 1000mm! The 300mm IQ doesn't seem affected at all by TC's. On the 70D with the 1.4X made for an incredibly light 672mm!

yipDog Studios wrote in post #16458758
I'd say the bodies are the difference…1Dx vs 70D. The noise levels in the 70D are quite a bit higher requiring more post NR. Definitely affects the quality. Kind of a cool test though. I would normally shoot with my 5D mk3 as second camera but wanted to see how the 70D fared. Not bad for an sixth of the price of the 1Dx!
The lenses are both awesome. I am surprised that the 500mm came out as crisp as they did with the 2X TCIII. When I first got the lens I didn't have the same results. Must mean I've learned how to handle 1000mm! The 300mm IQ doesn't seem affected at all by TC's. On the 70D with the 1.4X made for an incredibly light 672mm!

Yes, I've found similar. At 1000mm, stability is critical. As well as a top spec tripod and head (I use a Gitzo series 5 CF + wimberley head II) long lens holding technique is as important. One tip I got from one of the bird sites was to place the friction knob from the lens hood at the bottom of the lens and hold that as well as the camera whilst taking the shot.
I'd be interested to compare pp technique with you at some stage, I suspect what you do with aircraft is probably not too different from what I do with birds.

2slo wrote in post #16458701
/\ That looks all right to me. What exactly do you find wrong with it?

Mark,

The image to me seems to lack a certain clarity that I am hoping to achieve someday.
I know I have seen sharper images, and I know that 300mm with a 2X extender will lead to a bit of compromise, but I am wondering what others can achieve with the same lens.

Maybe these sharper images that I have in my mind were with longer (native) lenses, I just don't know. Maybe I am asking or hoping for too much with a mere 300. Also, I am not that skilled in processing, which perhaps may improve on it.

I did a search on Flickr and could not find a crisp one, but I will keep trying. I'm sure they are there.

The moon was a bright as a torch / flashlight when I was taking images and I know that that is not the best condition to try it in either.

Man, I love this lens though!!

BTW, I really enjoy looking at your images and value your comments on the forum.
Many of the images are super crisp and just beautiful.
I must also admit to a bit of envy of your 1DX.

Cheers,

Mark A.

Apologies to the thread for posting some non 300mm images. Just wanted to show a comparisons.

Mark A. wrote in post #16459386
Mark,

The image to me seems to lack a certain clarity that I am hoping to achieve someday.
I know I have seen sharper images, and I know that 300mm with a 2X extender will lead to a bit of compromise, but I am wondering what others can achieve with the same lens.

Maybe these sharper images that I have in my mind were with longer (native) lenses, I just don't know. Maybe I am asking or hoping for too much with a mere 300. Also, I am not that skilled in processing, which perhaps may improve on it.

I did a search on Flickr and could not find a crisp one, but I will keep trying. I'm sure they are there.

The moon was a bright as a torch / flashlight when I was taking images and I know that that is not the best condition to try it in either.

Man, I love this lens though!!

BTW, I really enjoy looking at your images and value your comments on the forum.
Many of the images are super crisp and just beautiful.
I must also admit to a bit of envy of your 1DX.

Cheers,

Mark A.

Below is my best moon shot. It is with a 500mm f4 II with a 2X TCIII on a 1Dx. Wimberly head on a heavy Induro tripod, remote shutter release. Wanted to show what the full frame looked like vs a crop. I know there are other times of the year when the moon is bigger but I think using the 300 with a 2X isn't going to get you the shot you need. Even on a crop body it's an equivalent 960mm which would be close but the sensor resolution isn't going to be there. That's the tradeoff. I have done shots with my 5D mk3 which yields a bit better resolution than the 1Dx but the noise difference made the 1Dx a bit nicer. You also have to take into account where you are shooting from. Atmospheric distortion will soften a shot too.

Thank you Rob for the images and opinions. I agree with what you wrote. Thanks for taking the time to show how it is done. (Also, your aviation shots are stunning!!)

I don't think that I will be acquiring longer lenses in 2014, so I will continue to use the 300 as best I can. This is really a long shot and the 300 is pretty versatile otherwise.

My image was taken in haste. When this moon was on the horizon is was huge, dimmer, and of a beautiful color. I know there are charts and tables for when this occurs again so with some planning I may be able to do better next time.

To be fair, mine is not nearly as sharp as some of the folks who use telescopes as part of the equation. Swear I could see Neil's footsteps on one guy's pic. He was using very specialized gear which cost as much as the 500mm f4 II. No way to pick it up and shoot sports though!
The 300mm f2.8 is a great lens that can take on a lot more than you'd think! Try an outdoor portrait with it sometime!!

Mark A. wrote in post #16459386
Mark,

The image to me seems to lack a certain clarity that I am hoping to achieve someday.
I know I have seen sharper images, and I know that 300mm with a 2X extender will lead to a bit of compromise, but I am wondering what others can achieve with the same lens.

Maybe these sharper images that I have in my mind were with longer (native) lenses, I just don't know. Maybe I am asking or hoping for too much with a mere 300. Also, I am not that skilled in processing, which perhaps may improve on it.

I did a search on Flickr and could not find a crisp one, but I will keep trying. I'm sure they are there.

The moon was a bright as a torch / flashlight when I was taking images and I know that that is not the best condition to try it in either.

Man, I love this lens though!!

BTW, I really enjoy looking at your images and value your comments on the forum.
Many of the images are super crisp and just beautiful.
I must also admit to a bit of envy of your 1DX.

Cheers,

Mark A.

Thanks Mark, I appreciate that.

yipDog Studios wrote in post #16460532
The 300mm f2.8 is a great lens that can take on a lot more than you'd think! Try an outdoor portrait with it sometime!!

Absolutely right. One of the portrait shots I took with mine is going into a competition today. I like the results from it sometimes even above shots I've taken with my 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II and my 85mm f/1.2.

2slo wrote in post #16460627
Absolutely right. One of the portrait shots I took with mine is going into a competition today. I like the results from it sometimes even above shots I've taken with my 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II and my 85mm f/1.2.

Plus it's fun to see the subject's face when you walk away...and keep on walking! Then have to yell direction to them!

Butting in,in case some don't know (I bet most do); shooting the Moon when on or near the horizon gives you roughly 70 miles of atmosphere to image through (bad); shooting the Moon when straight overhead yields 6-7 miles of atmosphere (much better).
One quality of air that we can't see but light must negotiate is humidity...which is to say a shot in the desert southwest has a much better chance than in the humid southeast.
Apologies for the intrusion

Shot with the 2xIII

^Very nice.

Also taken with the 300mm + 2x TCIII:

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #16468686
Butting in,in case some don't know (I bet most do); shooting the Moon when on or near the horizon gives you roughly 70 miles of atmosphere to image through (bad); shooting the Moon when straight overhead yields 6-7 miles of atmosphere (much better).
One quality of air that we can't see but light must negotiate is humidity...which is to say a shot in the desert southwest has a much better chance than in the humid southeast.
Apologies for the intrusion

This is helpful. Thanks!