Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 19, 2006, 7:01 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
killdeer0007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,328
Default

I'm presently using the Canon 300 F4 (with the 1.4 extender) most of the time but have trouble getting good shots in low light - even with a flash.

So, I was thinking of getting the 300 F2.8 or the 400 F4.

Which is better optically?

Thanks

//jim
killdeer0007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 19, 2006, 9:16 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

There is no comparison to 300 f2.8 IS. It is teh sharpest canon lens out there. Even with 1.4xTC, you won't see any quality difference. People post very good shots with 2x TC on it. But if you considering 400 f4 DO then why not look at 500 f4 IS (roughly same price)? For wildlife/birds, only 600 f4 IS beats the 500 f4 and 500 f4 is much more managebale.
bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2006, 9:46 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
killdeer0007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,328
Default

Thanks for the advice Bobby

I need to keep the weight down as much as possible becauseI like to hike or snowshoe to find the birds. I'm always surprised how close they will let me get to them. The biggest problem is the lighting in the forest. Even if it is a sunny day the trees block most of the light. It isn't often I find them in good light.

I'll have to go to the Canon web site to check on the weight of the different lenses.

//jim
killdeer0007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2006, 11:54 PM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

bobbyz wrote:
Quote:
There is no comparison to 300 f2.8 IS. It is teh sharpest canon lens out there.
... and I agree 100% - The 300mm f/2.8's MTF is superb!

I also favor the 500mm f/4 over the 400mm f/4 DO, because of the longer reach plus it's also at the limit of handholdability - IMO the 400mm f/4 do not offer any real advantage since you can get the same reach or more with teleconverters on the 300 f/2.8



Until I get my own 500 f/4 shortly, I can live with the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 pictured here: :lol: :-) :G


NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2006, 11:40 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

Beautiful shot, NHL!!!

Jim- Why not look at canon 400mm f5.6 prime. It is one of the lightest lens out there. has no IS but you can use 1.4xTC on it (cheap tamron one) and still AF. It is one of the best lens out there for birds in flight.
bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2006, 3:38 PM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

bobbyz wrote:
Quote:
Why not look at canon 400mm f5.6 prime. It is one of the lightest lens out there. has no IS but you can use 1.4xTC on it (cheap tamron one) and still AF.
Excellent advice - or trade your 300mm f/4L for the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 EX (until you can get the 500 f/4)

-> It's only 1/2 the price of the 300mm f/2.8L and quite decent with a 2x teleconverter still:



NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:26 PM.