action99 wrote:
I'm super curios to see how it perform with the 1.4x, if it is in the ballpark of the 200-400 at 400 F4 I would be super interested in this lens.
I should get mine for Friday I think not sure of that yet but hoping. I will be testing with the 1.4x and 2x. I am hoping the 1.4x replaces the 200-400 also. I sold mine so I hope so
If anyone is looking I know Competitive Camera had one and Hunt's video in Melrose, MA had one also. I was on the list and they notified me but I passed on them as I have one secured already.
I received my copy today and used it for a high school soccer game this evening. My first impressions are that it is very good overall. I would say image quality and sharpness is on par with my 300 IS II f2.8 and I have a very good copy of it. Image sharpness appears equal to me. I believe the 300 prime may have a slightly better background blur but I am not a technophobe and can only go on my first hand user impressions. It is markedly better than my Sigma sport 120-300 and I have a very good copy of it. You will be surprised how light it feels and it seems to balance a little better than the 300. In situations where 300 is the optimal length on the long end it will be a good lens. It's not going to be a big field lens though the 200-500 will in good light. I plan to buy a 1.4 teleconverter to turn it into the closest thing to an RF 200-400 f4. If you are looking for one I think the will be in short supply for a while. I have had an incredibly good service from Terry Nixon at Texas Media Systems. They have found me copies of hard to get items when others could not do so and they are excellent at keeping me informed until they have one. If you want to have a priority place in line with a dealer other than the big two or three it's best to put your money down instead of telling them to call you when they get one in. If you pay for one you will move past those folks in line most times. It's an expensive lens but the RFs are quite a bit more expensive than their EF counterparts. The rack rate for a 200-400 or the 300 are not inexpensive. It's a little sad that the price of gear keeps going up while the opportunities to make money with it, in sports photography generally, seem to have gone largely to the wayside. My last observation is that if Canon had cared about sports shooters they would have put a similar zoom ring on the 70-200. The ring on the 100-300 has a reasonable revolution and is easy to operate in contrast to the 70-200 which is awkward as heck. I still contend they did not have a sports shooter on the design team for that one.
Amazing how you guys are getting them with the embargo. I have 4 lenses I can get from 4 stores and none could ship before today. One is even local and I could pick up in person but still a no go. Congrats on who is getting them early.
It feels better balanced to me but to be honest when you buy something new you want it to be what you hope it will be. The body is longer than the 300 and the hood is shorter so the overall length seems to be the same. I am assuming that was by design. It feels the same weight at the 300. My initial impression was that it would be an excellent lens for basketball, hockey, softball and baseball (infield at least) and for most track and field.
Super stores like B&H I am sure get the lion's shares of the early orders but do not think they get proportionately as many early units to fill those early orders. I think you are better off finding a store where you can be first in line. Give Terry Nixon a call at Texas Media Systems a call. He will tell you when he will next receive one and from my experience he will give you an accurate estimate. They will start popping up here and there but I think they will go pretty quickly when they do.
RobAmy wrote:
Hunt's Video in Melrose, Ma has one I believe. They called me again today to confirm I did not want it. You can try calling and may get lucky.
Llewtwo wrote:
Super stores like B&H I am sure get the lion's shares of the early orders but do not think they get proportionately as many early units to fill those early orders. I think you are better off finding a store where you can be first in line. Give Terry Nixon a call at Texas Media Systems a call. He will tell you when he will next receive one and from my experience he will give you an accurate estimate. They will start popping up here and there but I think they will go pretty quickly when they do.
This is exactly what happened with the very limited initial release of the RF 135/1.8 and there's a thread discussing this for those interested.
Here are a couple quick shots with the 2x. It was a bit harsh out but wanted to try it. So far I really like the balance even with the 2x. The AF seems very responsive, I would say the same as my 400mm with the 2x. The throw for the zoom and nice. I will wait for better lighting and try the 1.4x also. Loving the weight over the 200-400mm also. So far I think it will make a nice replacement.
RobAmy wrote:
Here are a couple quick shots with the 2x. It was a bit harsh out but wanted to try it. So far I really like the balance even with the 2x. The AF seems very responsive, I would say the same as my 400mm with the 2x. The throw for the zoom and nice. I will wait for better lighting and try the 1.4x also. Loving the weight over the 200-400mm also. So far I think it will make a nice replacement.
IOW, AF acquisition is faster than the 200-400, which already was not that speedy against the 400 primes, IMO. WRT to the zoom throw, do you mean the distance or the resistance? Or both? This is one thing that has bothered me a bit with the 200-400, that it feels 'heavier' than I would like when zooming. I'd like it to be more fluid, easier.
rscheffler wrote:
IOW, AF acquisition is faster than the 200-400, which already was not that speedy against the 400 primes, IMO. WRT to the zoom throw, do you mean the distance or the resistance? Or both? This is one thing that has bothered me a bit with the 200-400, that it feels 'heavier' than I would like when zooming. I'd like it to be more fluid, easier.
AF definitely seems faster than the 200-400mm. The AF feels like I am using my 400mm f2.8 when using extenders. By throw I was speaking to distance. I feel like the resistance is less but I honestly do not remember how the 200-400mm felt compared. It does feel smooth throughout, you can hear it a bit and more so the faster you turn it.
anyone have leads where i can order today>? CHeers
