garyvot Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Canon 300/2.8 IS v1 Lenses Price-Peformance | |
Al Goldis wrote:
Gary, I think you must have an extraordinary copy of the 400 DO 1. I generally don't hear good things (or see good things from the MTF charts) about image quality in that lens.
Another reason to get the 300/2.8 over the 400DO is low light, i.e. night sports. Sometimes you really need that extra stop. Obviously, the 100-400 and 400/5.6 don't help you either in those situations.
I certainly agree a 300 2.8 is a more flexible choice, depending on what you shoot.
Re. my 400 DO: I think it's probably more typical than not. I do think there were some bad copies floating around from early production runs, but that the lens is probably better than its reputation.
When I say it is "professionally sharp", I mean just that: I think one can produce professional quality images with a good copy of this lens given competent technique. But I am not claiming that I think it has the biting sharpness, contrast, and AF performance of the latest generation of lenses. My recommendation to the OP was in the context of him seeking a "bargain" lens, and this may fit the bill there.
Here are a few examples from my practice and a maybe surprising sharpness comparison.
(The test images show a comparison between my 400 DO and my 300 2.8L IS v1 with 1.4X III. These were shot on a tripod, using mirror lockup and a 10 second timed release, with IS turned off on both lenses. Focus was achieved in Live View via contrast detect AF at 10X magnification. Processed in ACR with default sharpening settings and luminance NR disabled. I think the 400 holds its own, and may even be a bit better here.)
|