Upgrade to 300mm f/2.8L IS?

Hi All

First I bought 70-200mm f/2.8L IS and intention was to use it with 1.4X TC for birding. One shoot and I realized limitations and this one is sitting in bag ever since then. I immediately bought a Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS and 7D and shooting with this combo for past few months.

I spent almost all my weekends in field practicing and capturing birds. But it happens all the time that birds are most active at early morning and at dusk when sun is down and this lens is way too slow in such situations (in good light it is very good).

So I am planning to sell the beloved 70-200 (as my main interest is wild life) and buy a 300mm f/2.8 IS and a 2X TC. Will this be best budget solution for birding and other wild life shooting?

Also,please let me know if I should keep 70-200 and sell 100-400 or the opposite.

Thanks

I think the decision to sell either lens (70-200 or the 100-400) is a hard call IMO. Having said that, if I were in your position I will sell the 100-400 and keep the 70-200. In my view, the 70-200 is such a great lens. Perhaps, not the most wise selection for birding but such a great lens nonetheless.
I just got myself a Canon 400mm f/5.6 and I only did this because the 300mm f/2.8 was too expensive for my budget. However, if you have the money go for it. My understanding is that the 300 f/2.8 is a very sweet lens.
Cheers,

The 300 2.8L IS requires good light when using the 2x to get a lot of keepers. With good technique it is a good combination even for BIFs once the AF system acquires the target. It is better with the 1.4x and stellar bare.

tcssas wrote in post #10537909
Hi All
I spent almost all my weekends in field practicing and capturing birds. But it happens all the time that birds are most active at early morning and at dusk when sun is down and this lens is way too slow in such situations (in good light it is very good).

So I am planning to sell the beloved 70-200 (as my main interest is wild life) and buy a 300mm f/2.8 IS and a 2X TC. Will this be best budget solution for birding and other wild life shooting?

Also,please let me know if I should keep 70-200 and sell 100-400 or the opposite.

Thanks

If 400mm and f/5.6 is too slow then 600mm and f/5.6 is not likely to be faster.

You would have the option of shooting at 420mm and f/4 using the 300/2.8 with a 1.4X TC, but I would carefully review your shots and what speed you really think you need before buying another lens.

What about keeping the 100-400 and shifting to a camera with better high ISO capabilities instead? A 1D Mark IV coupled with the 100-400 might be a reasonable path considering the money you are looking to spend on lenses.

I agree with the above posters, adding a 2x TC to the 300mm f/2.8 will still require good light. All you are really gaining is extra focal length. I would expect image quality would be somewhat worse as well, though I have no experience with the 100-400. (For the record I'm very happy with what my 300mm f/2.8 can do with a 2x TC).

If it's the extra focal length you need then I would probably agree that the a 300mm f/2.8 with a 2x TC is the best budget option for getting to >400mm (within the Canon range at least) whilst maintaining features like IS and weather sealing.

The 300mm is a killer lens but I would not dump the 70-200 for it. I use the 70-200 more than anything because it's so useful.

Thanks all for your suggestions....Picures taken with 7D and 100-400 with exif can be seen on my Flickr account at: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/sn_saraf/ Most of the pictures have been only applied NR in PP.

your suggestions were so well directed that I almost got my answer.

I am a hobby photographer and only do Wild life and Landscapes. My wife also has the same shooting interest so I will preferably keep 100-400 (which she handles well).
We only have done one shoot with 70-200. I will be looking for something like EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS in near future which will be useful in landscape and indoor shoots.

I understand that 70-200 is very sweet lens but it is not at all being used and so I can not justify keeping it.

300 f/2.8 + 1.4x which becomes 420 f/4 gives good reach & speed for early morning and dusk shoots and when light is good I can use the 2x TC to make it 600mm f/5.6.
Trust me I can never buy 500 f/4 or 600 f/4 as these are way too expensive for me.

Apart from all this I have read very good things about 300mm w/o TC which I really want to feel.

Currently I have Manfrotto 190Xprob and 498RC2 combination. So not sure if it will work for 300mm with 1.4x/2x TC.

I will appreciate suggestions on this and looking forward for some pictures to keep me motivated and interested in buying my new toy (I really got nervous and almost dropped the idea of buying/selling)

Thank you

I don't know how the typical weather is in CT but I don't get when folks say they have to shoot early in the morning or late in the evening when birds are active. How much early morning or late evening we talking about? I shoot birds and find no problem shooting at f8 with my 500mmf 4 and 1.4xTC. Most folks use 1.4xTC with their f4 superteles and then they stop down 1 stop more. Even 800mm is f5.6 lens.

Unless you not shooting in deep canopy of the rain forest you don't need no f2.8 for birds IMHO.

Your 7d has pretty good high ISO. What ISO you typically use for your shots as I can't see any exif with flickr. I have shot with my old 30d and 400mm f5.6 at ISO1600 and get very good shots. Key is proper exposure not bringinup expsoure in pp.

bobbyz wrote in post #10539053
I don't know how the typical weather is in CT but I don't get when folks say they have to shoot early in the morning or late in the evening when birds are active. How much early morning or late evening we talking about? I shoot birds and find no problem shooting at f8 with my 500mmf 4 and 1.4xTC. Most folks use 1.4xTC with their f4 superteles and then they stop down 1 stop more. Even 800mm is f5.6 lens.

Unless you not shooting in deep canopy of the rain forest you don't need no f2.8 for birds IMHO.

Your 7d has pretty good high ISO. What ISO you typically use for your shots as I can't see any exif with flickr. I have shot with my old 30d and 400mm f5.6 at ISO1600 and get very good shots. Key is proper exposure not bringinup expsoure in pp.

Hi Bobby

Thanks for the wise words. I go out shooting before sun rise and many a times there is plenty of fog around and which makes lighting even worst. But still most of the time light is fine for f/4. and it should be fine with f/7.1 with ISO 1600.

But I have noticed that even at ISO 1000 I get a lot of grain though it can be taken care of using NR in PP I loose details in the process and image looks little softer.


Exif data for attached file is:
Camera Canon EOS 7D
Exposure 1/8000 sec
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 400 mm
ISO Speed 1600
Exposure Bias 0 EV

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

It sounds like you're pretty much set on buying the 300 f2.8 plus both teleconverters. And it also sounds like you've ruled out the 500 f4. I have the 300 f2.8 and both teleconverters and I don't think you'll be disappointed. The size & weight is easy to manage and you'll have three focal lengths fitting into just a moderate size backpack. I use it with my 1D Mark III's and also the 7D. Using the 300 + 2x + 7D is some pretty nice reach.

I rate them this way:
Bare 300 f2.8 = Outstanding! Wow.
300 + 1.4x = Very, very good
300 + 2x = Pretty good

If you stop down the aperture 2/3 or a full stop when using the 2x, the sharpness looks pretty darn good again. As you can imagine it does need pretty good lighting then. Not bright sun, but pretty good lighting.

Here are two shots with the 2x on the 7D at f7.1 and f8.

The 70-200 is a great portrait lens and good for walk around candid shots I used to own one. But it makes a crappy wildlife lens. I have the 100-400mm now which I absolutely love. It's true it needs lots of light to be at its peak. I don't think there is a comparable alternative in the same price range, but for $$$ you could always get a faster longer prime.

Thanks Gary for the encouraging word...
I understood from my previous experiences that delay always make things worst (we miss on moments and then whine). So I will buy this and I know my technique will improve with time as I am very serious about it and by the time I master the art I will have the right equipment to compliment my technique.

I truly can not invest in 500mm f/4 and can not carry it around the way I like it.

Thanks

Wow those 2x shots are very very impressive.

tcssas wrote in post #10540872
Hi Bobby

Thanks for the wise words. I go out shooting before sun rise and many a times there is plenty of fog around and which makes lighting even worst. But still most of the time light is fine for f/4. and it should be fine with f/7.1 with ISO 1600.

But I have noticed that even at ISO 1000 I get a lot of grain though it can be taken care of using NR in PP I loose details in the process and image looks little softer.

Exif data for attached file is:
Camera Canon EOS 7D
Exposure 1/8000 sec
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 400 mm
ISO Speed 1600
Exposure Bias 0 EV

Sachin,

In this shot you got lot of underexposure. You are at ISo1600 but ss is 1/8000??? Don't worry about the fog too much. It is actually better with soft diffused light. The background sky will appear drab though.

Best bang for the buck is 400mm f5.6. If you need IS then look at 100-400L IS or the 300m f4 IS with 1.4xTC.

edited: - I see you got 100-400L. In this example shot case ,even 500mm f4 or the 300/400mm f2.8 won't help much unless you exposure correctly

bobbyz wrote in post #10541072
Sachin,

In this shot you got lot of underexposure. You are at ISo1600 but ss is 1/8000??? Don't worry about the fog too much. It is actually better with soft diffused light. The background sky will appear drab though.

Best bang for the buck is 400mm f5.6. If you need IS then look at 100-400L IS or the 300m f4 IS with 1.4xTC.

edited: - I see you got 100-400L. In this example shot case ,even 500mm f4 or the 300/400mm f2.8 won't help much unless you exposure correctly

Thanks for the reply Bobby.

This picture was taken from Car window in awkward situation and this hawk was at quite a distance
As per Exif info : Subject Distance 44.4 m

(This picture is taken on a very cloudy day with little or no light.)

Would like to know if I have made some major mistake in this shot.

Thanks