EB-1 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
billsnature wrote:
Note for same magnification, you need to be much closer with 100-400 II that with 300mm f4 IS without the TC and way closer when you add the 1.4X TC to the 300mm.....Can you say focus breathing? Sure you can.(
technic wrote:
Yes, this is an important factor e.g. for skittish insects or when you can't get closer for other reasons. I'm using the 4/300IS for this type of shots and the 100-400II sounds attractive because of the better IS and flexibility, but it's difficult to weigh the pros and cons for closeups. Is the new zoom worth the huge price difference, higher weight and losing (almost) a stop in aperture? Is the 100-400II AF faster and at least as accurate despite the slower aperture? I guess the new zoom is an easy choice if you need at least 400mm most of the time (the 300 will lose in IQ and AF when using converter), but otherwise I doubt it is worth it.
I would also like to see some shots to compare bokeh for closeups, especially in situations like backlight or with specular highlights where there can be big differences. Btw, I don't see CA in my 4/300IS shots as mentioned in one of the posts above, but maybe that is because I'm using an older APS-C body? I'm not very happy with (micro-)contrast of my 4/300IS though, lots of room for improvement there.
Still hoping for an updated 4/300IS II ;-)
...Show more →
The AF of the 100-400 II is quite fast, and noticeably faster than the 300/4 IS.
The 300/4 IS was the first Canon lens I ever purchased and the CA was obvious to me on Velvia back then. I got another 300/4 IS around 2010 and it was about the same or perhaps a bit better.
EBH
|