Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2013 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?
  
 
jasonpatrick
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


I'm fairly certain that one of these models will be my next purchase combined with the 1.4 and 2x teleconverters. My current long lens is an excellent 100-400. As I've thought through this, and spent time reading the excellent reviews and posts here - It all comes down to weight for me. I don't want to be constrained by a tripod. I want to be able to use a monopod or use it handheld. The 500 is just too heavy for this. The 400 DO gets mixed reviews bare. With teleconverters, the mixed reviews go downhill. Please correct me if your experience differs from this.

Heres what the 100-400 lacks (for me) - limit of 400mm (380 or so when comparing to my old 400mm 5.6), and a limiting 5.6 aperture. That's it. The IQ is good enough for me. I don't sell these prints, this is just for my enjoyment.

There are no plan to upgrade cameras at this point, they depreciate too much, and I like what I have. I also don't find them to be limiting for the type of photography I enjoy (mostly wildlife and landscapes). If my camera is the limiting factor I would reconsider this. (5d classic and a 1dmk III)

I've read some really good things about the new mk II lenses paired with the mk III teleconverters. Most people say its more about autofocus than actual IQ. Bottom line here: Am i going to realize a noticable difference in weight reduction, autofocus improvement with teleconverters, and IQ improvement to justify the added cost? I'd also like to know if there's a difference in the converters on the old version (mk ii vs mkIII), or if there are any things I should be thinking about that. I'm not.
Thanks so much in advance!





Apr 26, 2013 at 02:57 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


The 300/2.8L IS Mk I is an awesome lens, with and without Mk III Extenders. No problems to use it handheld and on a monopod, for most subjects. OTOH, I normally use my 500/4L IS handheld for moving subjects and on a monopod for many other subjects. I prefer using a beanbag instead of a tripod, but I sometimes use a Wimberley Sidekick with my 468MG head, for my 300/2.8L IS and 500/4L IS.


Apr 26, 2013 at 03:09 PM
thedutt
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


I have 5D III + 300 2.8 IS V1 + 2x III + 1.4x II and am very happy with the performance for a amateur. I have no experience with 1DIII to know how the AF would be, but for large bird the 600 f5.6 IS works just fine. With that in mind, I would suggest save the money and upgrade to a 5DIII later if AF becomes a limitation. I can confirm that 5DIII with this combo is considerably better than 5DII center point (which should at least be on par with 5Dc).

2x -> Get the version III
1.4x -> If buying now, get the version III; If you already have II then you can stick with it.

Version II Teles with Version III extenders focus more accurately per canon, you may want to send a PM to patkel, he had both and can share his experience on how the two compare.

IMO the whole notion of depreciation is overblown for hobbyists. Its a investment in pleasure and not retirement

jasonpatrick wrote:
There are no plan to upgrade cameras at this point, they depreciate too much, and I like what I have. I also don't find them to be limiting for the type of photography I enjoy (mostly wildlife and landscapes). If my camera is the limiting factor I would reconsider this. (5d classic and a 1dmk III)

I've read some really good things about the new mk II lenses paired with the mk III teleconverters. Most people say its more about autofocus than actual IQ. Bottom line here: Am i going to realize a noticable difference in weight reduction, autofocus improvement with
...Show more



Apr 26, 2013 at 03:44 PM
John P Mulgrew
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


300 2.8 MKII!!! It's lighter and it's just one hell of a lens. I had the other version and would never think of switching back!


Apr 26, 2013 at 03:56 PM
drobertfranz
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


I have the 300mm F2.8L IS and it's a spectacular lens. I recently had a chance to use the version II lens aand optically I couldn't really see any difference. The difference in weight was not noticable to me. Not at all like the new versions of the 4000mm, 500mm and 600mm where the weight difference is huge and an important part of the upgrade decision..... If money is an issue I'd go with the older verison. Huge savings for sure. I also just tested my 300mm with the new 2x mk III and was very impressed. AF seemed very fast and the sharpness was outstanding.. I see a big improvement from my older 2x. Take a look . Here is an Image I took yesterday of my dog. I'll show an uncropped version and then cropped to 50% and then to 100%. My standard indentical sharpening on all 3 images....




  Canon EOS 5D Mark III    600mm    f/6.3    1/3200s    640 ISO    +0.4 EV  






  Canon EOS 5D Mark III    600mm    f/6.3    1/3200s    640 ISO    +0.4 EV  






  Canon EOS 5D Mark III    600mm    f/6.3    1/3200s    640 ISO    +0.4 EV  




Apr 26, 2013 at 04:14 PM
svetljo
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


i was recently looking at those, at least to my eyes the II is miles ahead in those crops
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=249&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=2&LensComp=739&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=2

maybe it is lens copy variation, who knows



Apr 26, 2013 at 05:10 PM
godfather
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


IMO the version II is probably worth the extra 2k. I had two different copies of the version I and I was never happy with the results w/ a 2x II attached. Looking at the TDP ISO crops there does appear to be a huge difference between the version one w/2xII and the version two w/2xIII.

I'd really like to try the new 300 w/extenders but I'm going to get by with cheaper glass this summer.



Apr 26, 2013 at 05:33 PM
jasonpatrick
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


Thanks everyone so far! I picked up a Mk 1 today. We'll see how it goes. I figure if I don't like it (doubtful) that I can resell for the price of a rental.


Apr 26, 2013 at 08:31 PM
OwlsEyes
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


Jason,
I bought my 300 f2.8IS in 2008 to accompany me to Tanzania for the first time. My lens was well used w/ a ding by the mount and a few scratches on the protective front element. Despite the limited abuse, the lens performed wonderfully from the first time I shot it. Since that time, it's been to Africa twice, Costa Rica more times than I can recall, on road trips to the Canadian Rockies, Yellowstone, the Tetons, and the list goes on. I shoot it throughout the MN winters and from canoes in the boundary waters. The images from it are nothing short of stunning and are only limited by the photographer.

I use mine with a 5DIII, but have used 1D to 1DIII, and a 7D. The lens is the only thing that is a consistent fixture in my bag since 2008.... nothing else remains since the time of that purchase. Mark I or Mark II... I don't think you'll be disappointed with what it can do. If you visit my blog site, you'll find that more than 90% of my wildlife work is with my 300 f2.8IS (... and I own a 100-400L).

have fun and enjoy your new lens!
bruce



Apr 26, 2013 at 11:08 PM
rrxjon
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


@OwlsEyes: interesting web site.


Apr 27, 2013 at 02:11 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



artsupreme
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


jasonpatrick wrote:
Thanks everyone so far! I picked up a Mk 1 today. We'll see how it goes. I figure if I don't like it (doubtful) that I can resell for the price of a rental.



Good move, there isn't a noticeable IQ difference and for that alone the II isn't worth the extra money over the v1 IMO unless you have everything else you need. I have both.



Apr 27, 2013 at 02:36 AM
Copypaste
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


Really happy with the 300mm 2.8 IS I. So sharp and great bokeh.


Apr 27, 2013 at 10:12 AM
lhdvries
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


artsupreme wrote:
Good move, there isn't a noticeable IQ difference and for that alone the II isn't worth the extra money over the v1 IMO unless you have everything else you need. I have both.


Plus 1!!!
Leon



Apr 27, 2013 at 12:14 PM
lowbone
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


Not to take anything away from the Mk II lens but the fact that the tripod collar does not come off pretty much cancels out the weight reduction factor over the Mk 1


Apr 27, 2013 at 12:26 PM
godfather
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


lowbone wrote:
Not to take anything away from the Mk II lens but the fact that the tripod collar does not come off pretty much cancels out the weight reduction factor over the Mk 1


That's a really good point. I always carry my lenses without the foot if I can and I would imagine the version 1 lens is about the same weight after the tripod collar is taken off.

Also I think the OP made a good decision because the image quality difference is mainly in the corners and he will be using a 1dIII which will crop that out.



Apr 27, 2013 at 12:36 PM
Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


jasonpatrick wrote:
I'm fairly certain that one of these models will be my next purchase combined with the 1.4 and 2x teleconverters. It all comes down to weight for me. I don't want to be constrained by a tripod. I want to be able to use a monopod or use it handheld. The 500 is just too heavy for this.



Remember that it's not all about the weight. Focal length is even more important when it comes to using tripod or not.
I would say it's as difficult to use the 300+2x handheld as using the 500 handheld. Or probably a little bit more difficult because it will give you a slower shutter speed + a longer lens.



Apr 27, 2013 at 12:40 PM
jasonpatrick
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


Thanks for the reminder, Lars. In those situations I'll be using a monopod with a ball head.

Lens will be here Monday. Can't wait to try it out!



Apr 27, 2013 at 02:04 PM
tarpon6
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


Does anyone have the RRS replacement foot for the II? Can you store and transport the lens with hood reversed with RRS foot installed?


Apr 28, 2013 at 11:51 AM
rolette
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


tarpon6 wrote:
Does anyone have the RRS replacement foot for the II? Can you store and transport the lens with hood reversed with RRS foot installed?

Yes and yes

Jay



Apr 28, 2013 at 03:52 PM
jasonpatrick
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · 300mm 2.8 IS I or II?


Got my copy of the 300mm f/2.8 IS ver 1 on Monday. Had a quick chance to play with it...and it's everything you guys said it would be. Excellent handling, not too heavy, and of course amazing IQ!

Got my 5 year old to stay still for good half a second while I took this .

http://jasonpatrick.smugmug.com/photos/i-LqpvLd8/0/X3/i-LqpvLd8-X3.jpg



May 01, 2013 at 03:40 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password