i need the pros opinions...
iandi own a canon 300 is. just made
a significant sale and am pondering
upgrade to the 400 is.
should i or should i not hold onto the 300?
fwiw... i shoot prep and D1 sports. the
300 w/ 1.4 has been good to me when
the light has been good, but under the
lights, even at D1, the 1.4 is limiting.
soo... pls, all you pros, give me your
thoughts
thanks
b
This has been discussed all over these forums before and you'll get a wide range of perspectives. I think most pros would say given the choice between a 300/f2.8 or a 400/f2.8 the winner would be the 400. My choice? 400. Hands down.
BTW, is it just me or are we seeing more gear threads around here lately? I personally think one benefit of not discussing gear on this specific forum is that it's really not about the gear. Doesn't hurt to ask someone what gear they used to get certain shots, but I hope we don't continue to see posts like this one.
Case in point, the OP appears to have made a "significant sale" of an image (I'm assuming it's an image sale) while using whatever gear he had at his disposal (which evidently didn't include a 400/f2.8).
Owning a 400mm doesn't make good business sense for me though. I can rent one locally like 70 times for what one costs. Considering how many times I actually need one (rather than just wanting one) I could stretch that money out over six years or so. In the mean time there's lots of other things I can do with the lump sum of six to eight grand.
Of course if it's more of a toy than a business tool, by all means, knock yourself out and enjoy!!
I used a 300 w/1.4X for a couple of years and then sold it to get the 400. There is simply no comparison. The 400 wins hands down. If you shoot field sports the 400/2.8 is the quintessential lens to have on the end of your monopod.
I bought the 300/2.8, wish I had the 400/2.8. I'll probably buy one next year or so, having said that I think I'll probably keep the 300 when I do - it's just too painful to sell L glass
I'd go 400. Almost always unless you shoot an inordinate amount of basketball. When was the last time you were wish for LESS glass? Probably been a while ...
The 400 is hands down the best for any sport you can name. I would find the 300 too short for football, baseball, softball, rugby, soccer, golf (for sure), even tennis or track.
TheDoc65 wrote:
I have and use both often. Can't bring myself to sell the 300. Just too useful.
That is where I am too. I figured that when I got my 400mm I'd sell my 300mm. But the 300mm is a great lens too. For field sports I use my 400mm all the time but for indoor sports and other news type events the 300mm is great. Also when I'm shooting D1 football I'll often have an assistant with me and then I carry both the 300mm and 400mm. (ok I don't carry them - the assistant does. )
TheDoc65 wrote:
I have and use both often. Can't bring myself to sell the 300. Just too useful.
+1.
I have both, use both and also have a 600/4 when I need more reach. If I had to pick just one though, it would be the 400 for its versatility and amazing IQ.
I have both, use both and also have a 600/4 when I need more reach. If I had to pick just one though, it would be the 400 for its versatility and amazing IQ.
+2
I definitely use both, particularly with prep sports where sideline access is often so good that the 400 can be too long. I use the 300 without extender for things like prep baseball and softball (infield), indoor swimming, basketball (far court), golf, some T&F, etc. The 400 or 600 is my lens of choice for field sports like football, lax, soccer, field hockey, but even then I'll sometimes switch off for a change of pace or a different viewpoint. For me, it's critical to have access to both, as I shoot at lots of venues and the access varies widely, even for the same sport.
how close can you get to the field and what are you shooting? If I were shooting D1 it would be the 400 but if it's high school/local where you have free access to the perimeter of the field, 300 is more than enough.
I've had both over the years and currently have the 300/f2.8IS which converts to a 400 with a IdMk3 or a 480 with a 50D. The biggest reason I have the 300 now is the weight as I travel so much - with airlines charging a fortune for excess baggage it is a life saver
As said, it depends on what you are shooting. Remember if you are shooting with a D3 you can switch from full crop to 1.5. When shooting baseball I have switched between the two crop options many times. I hate carrying two cameras and this helps with that. For football I usually carry two cameras with the second having a 80-200 2.8 zoom. Also, I got a 400 2.8 AF-S used lens (from this site). It's about half the price of a new one and is an amazing lens. It also is amazing with the 1.4 TC.
I once owned the 300/2.8IS and while it's a fantastic lens, I often found it too short for field sports by itself. I used the 1.4xTC on the lens 99% of the time, but this brought me up to f/4 which was fine for most outdoor stuff, but indoors was another story. When you shoot D1 football indoors and have to use 1/500, ISO6400, and f/2.8 you really appreciate a fast, long lens.
Needless to say, I sold my 300 to fund the purchase of my 1Ds-Mark III, but will be picking a 400/2.8IS up next summer. The 300 was great for some indoor sports like basketball and volleyball, but it was a bit tight most of the time and I ended up favoring my 70-200/2.8 and 135/2 for those sports when I needed some reach.
