 |
|
|
andy37
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 26, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 134
|
|
Review Date: Apr 30, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, speed of AF, sharp as a tack, IS makes shutter speeds as low as 1/50 possible with practice, not too heavy, great contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing as yet. Well apart from the prices here in the UK
|
|
|
Bought second-hand in mint condition from a UK seller. Hence the high price paid compared to US versions, (though a fair price for the UK market).
Short version:
I love this lens!
This is my first prime lens and also the first time I've used IS. So for me parting with cash was a bit of a gamble. All I had to go by was examples found on this forum and the reviews you'll no doubt read below.
IS is a great feature. I took several pictures today with ISO 200, f8, 1/50 of a second shutter speed. No way could I have done this without the IS.
I very much doubt I'll part with this lens unless of cause I need money to buy a new liver or lung.
It's an L lens so it's very high quality.
It's a prime so it's very sharp.
It has got IS so you can use it in poor light conditions
What more could you possibly want for that kind of money?
Buy one today!
|
|
 Apr 30, 2005
|
|
ArcftSpotter
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 7, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 168
|
|
Review Date: Apr 23, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Quality, constrast, weight, IS, build quality, everything!
|
|
Cons:
|
So far nothing! You can hear the IS but it doesn't bother me. Little expensive though.
|
|
|
I had a 75-300 III , sold that and got a 70-200 f/4L, had that for a week and realized it's too short, so I got this baby. It seems sharper than the 70-200 by alot and the IS also helps out alot. Will purchase the 1.4x II soon. Only hear great things about this lens, and I too, recommend this lens for anyone looking for a great telephoto prime. Sharp images, great, smooth bokeh, and it's even hand-holdable. Great lens!
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2005
|
|
adydula
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Location: N/A
Posts: 196
|
|
Review Date: Apr 22, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,150.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Outstanding, Outstanding , Outstanding...
Superb IS
Great Bokeh
Subject Isolation Capability
|
|
Cons:
|
Price...wish it was faster for the same money.
|
|
|
A wonderful, wonderful lens...
Isolates subjects, hand held shots at 1/60 etc not a real problem, IS is awesome..Beautiful color and wonderful bokeh. The IS makes you like a lens of 300mm length all the more...I dont know why i waited so long to get a lens like this. Close focusing distance is a big plus for me. Wonderful pseudo macro like pix are possible, flowers, butterfly shots are easy to do.
The lens is built lile a tank, and exudes Canon L Lens Quality.
Alex
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2005
|
|
carojane
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 17, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 10
|
|
Review Date: Feb 17, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,099.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Easy to handle, great image quality, large (manual) focusing ring, lightweight
|
|
Cons:
|
the IS circuit seems noisy (a low-grade hiss), the lens hood is difficult to pull out and retract
|
|
|
I have just purchased this lens and it is impressive, being easy to carry and use. I have the 300mm F4 non IS lens which will soon be sold as long as the new lens performs (and I am sure it will). Watch this space and I will provide further info on the performance and comparison of these two lenses in the field under similar conditions.
What I am not happy about is the low-grade hissing noise made by the IS circuit once the shutter is depressed and which continues for three seconds after you release the shutter (whether you take a photo or not). Have I left my bacon under the grill, no it's just my lens hissing! Please could someone out there tell me if this is normal?
I am using this lens with the EOS Rebel (300D) and in fact I have just taken a test shot at one fifth of a second, hand-held in low (tungsten light) and the same shot with the non-IS lens (I took two of this for surety and tried to keep my hands steady). The results were amazing. The IS pic was good, the other very blurred. I will upload them both if I can find out how to do that.
The lens hood of the new lens is difficult to pull and push whereas the hood on the old lens just fell in & out as soon as you moved it!!
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2005
|
|
thitran
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 5, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 266
|
|
Review Date: Feb 1, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
IS is amazing, sharp, contrast, built quality
|
|
Cons:
|
A little noisy with IS on and the hood does not operate smoothly
|
|
|
This is my first IS lens and it's simply amazing! Now I can take pictures at 1/13, 1/15 sec and still get very sharp, contrasty images. The lens is very well built and produces very sharp images. I can see why there are so many IS lens at sporting events. Now, I'm hook on Canon's IS lens!
I think that Canon should produce an 70-200 f4 IS for under $1000. That would be really nice.
Thi
|
|
|
Feb 1, 2005
|
|
crnama
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 16, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 537
|
|
Review Date: Jan 19, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $950.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, IS, Focus Speed
|
|
Cons:
|
Slight noise when IS turns on.
|
|
|
I bought this lens to take bird pictures on a budget. I was using my 70-200 2.8 with a 2x TC, but the pictures are so much sharper with the 300 I will never go back. It is a great lens and I am very glad I bought it.
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2005
|
|
rz22g
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 17, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 62
|
|
Review Date: Jan 17, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $950.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp images, Good Price, IS, USM, Built on hood and light weight.
|
|
Cons:
|
Some focus hunting
|
|
Purchased this one new for $950. This is the first L lens I have owned. I used the 300 F/4 L non IS and it is what got me to looking at this lens. I have not done any major critiquing concerning sharpness between the two versions but at standard viewing I see no advantage to either with IS disabled. Enable the IS version lens and you will see a difference, especially in low light. Even at higher shutter speeds the IS improves sharpness. I have not looked back since purchasing this lens. My only complaint is that you might run into some focus hunting in lower light conditions.
I almost purchased the 300 non IS used because I was not aware that an IS version had been made. I'm glad I found out about the IS version. My advise to anyone debating between the two is to go for the IS. You will use it and when your not you can disable it. The option is just not there for the Non IS version.
Not a great image by my first Raptor image with my new 300 L IS.
http://www.pbase.com/rz22g/image/38303564
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2005
|
|
paparazzinick
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 8, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 7003
|
|
Review Date: Jan 9, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, sharp, sharp, good IS, fast focus in good light
|
|
Cons:
|
hunts in low light but once found it is awesome.
|
|
|
I use this for indoor sports and outdoor sports. great for the long reach. Is is good too. I use the pan IS when shooting indoor hockey to get some cool shots. Wish I would have had the money for the 2.8 version, but this one is great.
|
|
|
Jan 9, 2005
|
|
oshun
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 26, 2004
Location: N/A
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Dec 27, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,067.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp as a tack , excellent contrast , color and background blur . IS modes work really well , excellent built in hood. Works really well with the 1.4x EF extender .
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
This lens resides on my camera when going to the Everglades .
It is relatively light for a 300mm and focuses very fast on my 10d .
As good as my 70-200mm F4l is , I can see myself buying more primes if the quality is anything like this lens .
Here are two pictures of birds taken recently at the Everglades national park .
http://www.pbase.com/oshun/image/37220234
http://www.pbase.com/oshun/image/37826680
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2004
|
|
gmcfly
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 9, 2003
Location: Brazil
Posts: 81
|
|
Review Date: Dec 24, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,120.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Size and weight, image quality, IS, build quality (good hood and tripod mount) close focus distance.
|
|
Cons:
|
AF not so fast.
|
|
|
Very nice lens.
My first IS lens, and I really like it!
|
|
|
Dec 24, 2004
|
|
doctordoom16
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 13, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Dec 13, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light weight, retracable hood is perfect, IS works very good in low light, Fast AF (on 20D), sharp pictures, great bokeh, color/contrast.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
I was torn between this and the 100-400, but due to my positive experience with the 135 f/2, i went with the prime. i could not afford the 300 f/2.8, and i am very satisfied with this lense. The build quality is excellent, the AF is fast, the bokeh is amazing (not as nice as the 135 f/2, but close). I miss the 2.8, but the IS and the 20D's clean higher ISO makes up for it. I shot on a very overcast day w/ the 1.4x tele at ISO 800 and 1/250 sec to capture some soccer action, and the pictures were very good. I will say the AF hunts alot with the 1.4 tele in lower light, but some prefocising helps. This lense is a great addition to any photo nuts collection. If you need a zoom, get the 100-400, if you find yourself shooting the zoom at 400 all the time, like i do, you should save the $400 and get this lense and the 1.4x tele for the optical performance.
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2004
|
|
Cedric_g
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 14, 2004
Location: France
Posts: 263
|
|
Review Date: Nov 25, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,207.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Good sharpness, maniability, IS, quality : the ideal lens for wildlife photography in approach !
|
|
Cons:
|
May be a little sharper, like the non IS version ?...
|
|
I have longer hesitated between this lens and the 100-400 L IS USM zoom, to replace my Sigma 135-400mm... But I wanted too a more luminous lens, so my choice was the 300/4 L IS USM !
I don't regret now, because I worked only at 400mm with my old 135-400, and primes are of better quality globaly than zooms.
The sharpness is really good, increasing when stop down ; may be a little sharper (like the non IS version) ?... ;-)
In maniability ? The best !!! Not too heavy, not too long, IS, luminous aperture, 1.50 meter working distance... All points are positive !
Some pics for testing my lens (crops, fullsize pics) : http://www.pbase.com/cedric_g/canon_300mm_f40_l_is_usm
|
|
|
Nov 25, 2004
|
|
Teague
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 9, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 183
|
|
Review Date: Sep 17, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,624.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Really sharp even wide open, Light weight, image quality, built in hood, IS, beats 100-400 hands down.
|
|
Cons:
|
haven't found any.
|
|
Sold my 100-400 to buy this and boy am I pleased I did. 2 lenses in one with my 1.4x extender and no discernable loss of image quality. Its lightweight make it easy to carry around for long periods and the built in hood is great at saving space in my AW Photo Trekker. Excellent build quality, if you need a 300mm with IS, go for this. My first pic with this lens.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/131032
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2004
|
|
Choun W
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 3, 2003
Location: Thailand
Posts: 27
|
|
Review Date: Aug 2, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,268.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp @wide open, very good contrast and color reproduction, resolution is very good and not seen any drop on sharpness with EF1.4X combination, IS mode is very usefull for hand holding.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
my interesting for this lens is Bird photo which I could not buy a very expensive prime lens for this moment.
This combination 300f4 IS with EF1.4xII is very good for me to start get myself into this birding photo.
Here the link to some sample of what result I got from this lens.
http://www.pbase.com/image/32039523
Updated: So far I'm very happy with this combination, one point that have to awared, since the picture I take with 1D MarkII I found that the contrast and color saturation has to increase a bit (one step each in camera setting) for this combination.
http://www.pbase.com/image/32585705
Updated: here the link to some photos of bird I took with combination of this 300f4IS together with Canon EF1.4xII, let see at: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/124760
|
|
|
Aug 2, 2004
|
|
Argyle Monkey
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 14, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 253
|
|
Review Date: Jul 31, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,139.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great image quality, relatively compact, IS, well balanced, great minimum focusing distance.
|
|
Cons:
|
AF could be quicker.
|
|
|
Ended up buying this instead of the 100-400 because I prefer primes. Not to mention the fact that it's a couple hundred bucks cheaper. It's a great lens. Has excellent bokeh and an awesome minimum focusing distance. The IS works as advertised even though it does have a clunck when it engages. The only thing that could be better is the AF speed. It's noticably slower than my 200 2.8.
|
|
|
Jul 31, 2004
|
|
dzar
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 19, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Jul 5, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,135.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
-large, rubberized, smooth feeling focus ring
-built in hood
-came with a tripod mount
-maintains autofocus with 1.4 extender
|
|
Cons:
|
-this will eventually lead to the bigger primes, probably the 500(con?)
-the little clunk when IS kicks in
thats really all I can think off.
|
|
|
Went through the common dilemma as others when first looking at this lens: should I get the 100-400 or the 300 w/1.4 extender. I tried both and kept both. Yeah, I know...alot of help that was. The main reason I kept the 300 was that it felt quicker on the draw. Also, the less than 1 stop advantage in speed @300 was, to me, significant.
The 100-400 felt better for quickly framing objects moving toward and away from the camera. But, I felt much more comfortable with the 300 in hand. Nothing againts the push/pull...I would feel the same way if it was a twist. Plus, I like not having to always worry about the zoom friction adjustment. Composing objects that I would otherwise zoom out for left me with some interesting shots. Ones that I would not have taken with the 100-400 and vice versa. Sometimes I feel like I need the 100-400 to get what I want. Hope this helps one make the decision.
Of course, shots had great contrast/sharpness throughout. Even with the 1.4 extender. Never tried the 2x. When I can get the distance between subject and backround, bokeh looks evenly shaped and smooth.
I would definately buy again. More Canon telephoto primes will definately follow.
|
|
|
Jul 5, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
169
|
313791
|
May 15, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
97% of reviewers
|
$1,060.26
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.71
|
9.15
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
