|
|
burychka
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 13, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 190
|
|
Review Date: Dec 29, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $4,340.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
So sharp, it almost makes your eyes bleed...and wide open at that; retains its sharpness with 1.4xII extender and still good with the 2xII extender.
|
|
Cons:
|
Price (unavoidable, I guess) and that ridiculous leather lens "cap"
|
|
We've got the 500 F4 IS, so I have experience with big Canon lenses. While the 500 delivers what one expects, the 300 is just plain remarkable. When it arrived, I did some quick test shots in the house. Shot the box from a big toy we bought for a grandson. Step 3 50's diner. Big box with color pictures and text on the side. Took the first shots with the 5D2 on a tripod and using the 2 second timer in lieu of cable release. Shot at 2.8, 4, 5.6, and 8.
When I looked at the first image at 100% in DPP, my reaction was that something is wrong with the lens. Edge of the text and pictures on the box looked to have a fuzzy dot pattern. I looked at the box again, and it looked OK. But then I looked with a light and magnifying glass, and there it was--the same dots and fuzz I saw in the digital image. Yes, the lens saw better than I did, and even so at F2.8. Wide open. Only a little sharper at F4 and F5.6, then a slight deterioration at F8.
I continued the test shots at ISO 100, 200, and 400, and with the Canon 1.4xII and 2xII, also at the alternate ISO's. The only image flaws I found were camera shake with the extenders and resulting slow shutter speeds. The higher ISO took care of that. With the extenders, I found that stopping down one full stop improved the image sharpness, although both extenders produced some CA. Repeating the same tests with a crop camera yielded pretty much the same, although the crop eliminated a lot of the CA.
Christmas day with a big family gathering, I mostly used a normal zoom, but from time to time I switched to the 300 for some random closeup face shots--when I could get far enough from the subject for focus, that is. Again, great sharp eyelashes and eyes. Of course the narrow depth of field at F2.8 left noses and ears out of focus.
Compared to the 500 F4, this is a lightweight. Heavier than the 70-200 F2.8IS, but w-a-a-y sharper. Very nice bokeh, too. Still, it's a lot of money for a hobby, even a shared hobby.
|
|
 Dec 29, 2009
|
|
terminator
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 193
|
|
Review Date: Sep 30, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Crazy sharp wide open!!! f/2.8! fast auto-focus, distance switch improves auto-focus speed, IS works like a charm, build like a tank
|
|
Cons:
|
2-stop IS, auto-focus can be faster, attract lots of eyeballs especially when the hood is put on
|
|
This is one of the dream lens that I'd never thought I would own. But now I own it! Woohoo! Everything good about this beast is true: sharpness, color, IS, speed, focus, build, etc. It is the best sporting lens for your young kid(s).
Given its age, I think Canon should upgrade the lens, and there are several things Canon can improve: use new IS technology to make it effective for 4-5 stops, speed up AF a little bit, and reduce the weight significantly. Of course, all should be done without compromising the image quality.
|
|
|
Sep 30, 2009
|
|
nazdravanul
Online
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 2, 2008
Location: Romania
Posts: 114
|
|
Review Date: Jul 14, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Amazing lens. No other words to describe it.
|
|
Cons:
|
I wish it had the new 4 stop IS like my 200 2 IS does :).
|
|
I couldn't justify both the 200 2 IS and this amazing lens (simply from a purely economic POV, if I could afford it, I would have definitely kept both  ).
|
|
|
Jul 14, 2009
|
|
solomon10
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Nov 21, 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 73
|
|
Review Date: Apr 30, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Bokeh, sharp, IS, ability to use converters very well.
|
|
Cons:
|
None, ok maybe price.
|
|
I upgraded from the non IS version. The non IS version is very good considering the price you can get them for, but in my opinion the IS version delivers critical sharpness time after time. I do not earn any money from photography at the moment, so it difficult to justify why i should have such a lens. If you are thinking the same, you will not be disappointed, just amazed at the quality. Buy one used and see it as an investment
|
|
|
Apr 30, 2009
|
|
sivrajbm
Online
Image Upload: On
Registered: Mar 15, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2073
|
|
Review Date: Mar 12, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $3,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast, Sharp, Excellent IQ, Mad Bokem, Built like a tank, Beautiful Build Quality...WOW worth every dime...
|
|
Cons:
|
Doesn't come with CP and a nice storage place in hard case or nice soft case, picky huh :-)
|
|
Ok, first of all got this beauty for a GREAT price. (Still had that new lens smell ) Totally unmarked with all the parts, UT date code. I've shot and played with it for a month before I gave this review. This lens is the BOMB, it's fast to focus and EXTREMELY sharp. I can see why everyone raves about this lens. I shot some HS Football with a non-is version and knew I had to have my own. Almost bought a Sigma 300, then a non-is, then I found this one on here. This is my first Great White and it's excellent it also takes the 1.4tc extremely well. I bought a nice Domke J-612 and Canon CP for it. I'm planning to get a 2x II before LLBB season gets started. All I can say is WOW it's worth every dime...
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2009
|
|
dolina
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 5, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 1125
|
|
Review Date: Feb 24, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Image quality is superb, fast 2.8 opening
|
|
Cons:
|
Old (circa 1999), 2-stop IS, heavy, hood is tough to mount & dismount as compared to the 800L IS, AF motor is louder than the 800L IS, Almost gets as much attention as the 800L IS which is a good/bad thing depending on who gives the attention
|
|
I will benchmark the 300/2.8L IS to a lens marketed back in 2008, the 800L IS.
Both deliver excellent photo quality. Both weigh a bit but the 800L IS had better balance on a non-1 Series body. The 300 only has 2-stop IS not bad but could be nice to have 4-stops like the current 200/2L IS and 800L IS.
Hood's tougher to mount than the 800L IS. AF motor is louder too. It gets almost as much attention as the 800L IS in public. The attention could be good or bad depending on who is looking.
But at the end of the day... it delivers what it was designed for focusing spectacular images to the sensor.
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2009
|
|
cdryall
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 19, 2005
Location: United Arab Emirates
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 4, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
IQ, speed of focusing, IS, colour, absolute lack of CA, how well it takes a 1.4X TC and even a 2X acceptable - as good as it gets for me..
|
|
Cons:
|
Not cheap, can't remain inconspicious, maybe a black version would be an option?
|
|
IQ, IQ, IQ, finest lens I have ever had the pleasure to own. Wanted one for a long time but could not bring myself to part with the money. Can now really understand why pro's who make their living from such lenses turn to such...
May not be as versatile as a zoom and the price may be too much for many, but then again why do people (who shouldn't) buy a Ferrari or even a Bentley for that matter...
One of those items that brings the aaahh factor long after the price is forgotten.......
|
|
|
Feb 4, 2009
|
|
Chris B.
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Oct 7, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 523
|
|
Review Date: Dec 3, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $3,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Incredible sharpness, super fast AF, incredible build
|
|
Cons:
|
not a thing!
|
|
This has been on my "grail" list for a really long time and I recently had the opportunity to buy a "like new" (2007 date code) one for a very good price. It was perhaps the best photographic purchase I've ever made!
Incredibly stunning sharpness and detail!! Super fast focus!
Handles both the Canon 1.4x and 2x converters with ease. With the 1.4x, there's just no image degradation or loss of AF speed....nothing, nada! With the 2x, I have experienced a very small loss of image quality at wide open but as soon as you go down a stop, it comes back. With the 2x, there is also an AF slowdown but still very impressive.
On a xxD body, it's just incredible for birds!
This lens is a gem!!
|
|
|
Dec 3, 2008
|
|
Tobers
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 23, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 27
|
|
Review Date: Nov 23, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Stunning image quality, sharpness, build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Bit heavy
|
|
This review is for the NON-IS version.
Bought 2nd hand with a 1998 date code, so this is a 10-year-old lens. After a bit of tweaking of focus micro-adjustment to -12, this lens is stunning. Jaw droppingly good images that are sharp and crisp with great colour & contrast straight out of the camera. Focus is extremely fast. Way better in all respects than the Sigma 120-300 2.8.
Downsides - it's a bit heavy (I understand the IS version is 0.5kg lighter), and I'd like a longer tripod foot so I can use it as a handle to carry the thing.
However, if you want image quality, this is the daddy.
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2008
|
|
SR777
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 10, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 277
|
|
Review Date: Nov 8, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $3,650.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Superb sharpness, colour, AF...everything about this lens is top notch
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing
|
|
Superb colour, super sharp, no CA whatsoever, fast AF (can't imagine it being faster). What a lens!
The weight is perfect, balances very well on a 1D2. Very easy to hand hold. IS works very well.
The lens takes both 1.4x and 2x Canon teleconverters very well. The sharpness and colour are maintained with the 1.4x. Stopping down a third of a stop with the 2x results in increased sharpness from the very usable images when used wide open.
Can't see what can be improved with this lens. Little wonder this lens is regarded as amongst the very best ever made.
|
|
|
Nov 8, 2008
|
|
skibum5
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 20, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4087
|
|
Review Date: Oct 13, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $3,650.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharpness, contrast, focusing speed and accuracy, low-light performance, as good as it gets at wide open, no CA, no PF under any circumstance, handles the 1.4x TC very well
|
|
Cons:
|
bulk, cost
|
|
the AF is as good as it gets and no lens i've used has been more flawless at wide open, simply zero CA, zero PF even under the worst circumstances, no purple/green to OOF areas
the bulk does make it more unweidly than the 300 f/4 so it's a tad tougher to stop tracking a player on the dime with it and it's so wide it also makes tracking a touch trickier, but it is still worth it, gives you less DOF, better focusing and image quality and lets you shoot indoors and night games.
noticeably better focusing and image quality than the sigma 120-300 (also lets in a little bit more light wide open and is a real 300mm as opposed to say 280mm or so)
frightfully expensive, but the other camera makers are even more frightful for this lens.
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2008
|
|
scalesusa
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 2, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 202
|
|
Review Date: Oct 6, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
It looks like it is going on sale for $150.00 off come later this month. The "Instant Rebate is already active in Canada"
|
|
|
Oct 6, 2008
|
|
|
