Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

2 3 4 end

Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

thedutt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

I was supposed to try out the 100-300 last week for eagles but due to some logistics, the loaner did not make it to me in time. As luck would have it, my local dealer just got one in stock and I am first on the waiting list. This youtube review indicated that it is not performing well with 2x for wildlife.

This review is also indicating that it is not as good as 600 f4 wide open vs 600 f5.6. It sounds like it is good for occasional zoom but not ideal as the primary wildlife lens. What is your experience? This would be replacing my 400 f2.8 RF; It is very tempting to consolidate the 100-500 RF and 400 RF into a single lens for travel.

Edit Aug 17th 2024:
I have finally processed all my photos that I want to keep from my recent trip to Alaska. I ended up taking both 100-300 & 400 f2.8 to the trip, but based on the results, If I had left the 400mm back, it would not have had a huge impact on my keepers.

Top photos , the ones I am sharing and printing etc: total: 35
100-300 f2.8: bare:15, 1.4x:4, 2x:9
400mm f2.8: bare: 0, 1.4x:4, 2x:0
24-105mm : 3

Photos that I like enough to keep them including variations of similar shots:
Bear photos in Hallo Bay
100-300 f2.8: bare:160, 1.4x: 55 , 2x: 215
400mm f2.8: bare:0 1.4x:60, 2x:0
24-105mm : 40

Sealions, Sealife, Artic Terns,Eagles,swans etc in Valdez/Anc:
100-300 f2.8: bare:8, 1.4x: 7, 2x: 3
400mm f2.8: bare:11,1.4x:52 , w/2x: 13
24-105mm : 98

All the photos in my two posts from hallo bay are with 100-300.

Edited on Aug 17, 2024 at 10:17 PM · View previous versions

Nov 28, 2023 at 03:54 PM

Karl Witt
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

Dropped you a PM of help

Karl

Nov 28, 2023 at 04:36 PM

Dragonfire
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

thedutt wrote:
This would be replacing my 400 f2.8 RF

I know of no lens that can replace the Canon's 400L IS 2.8 lens.

Nov 28, 2023 at 04:41 PM

action99
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

thedutt wrote:
I was supposed to try out the 100-300 last week for eagles but due to some logistics, the loaner did not make it to me in time. As luck would have it, my local dealer just got one in stock and I am first on the waiting list. This youtube review indicated that it is not performing well with 2x for wildlife.

This review is also indicating that it is not as good as 600 f4 wide open vs 600 f5.6. It sounds like it is good for occasional zoom but not ideal as the primary wildlife lens. What is your...Show more →

I own both 100-500 and 100-300, rented a few times RF 400 2.8. I don’t shoot birds, mostly sports and some mammals.

What kind of wildlife are you shooting?
Birds? Mammals? Safari? Local?

100-300 2.8 with 1.4 is sharper than 100-500 both wide open.

100-500 is a tad sharper than 100-300 + 2x both wide open

100-300 + 2x is sharper than 100-500 + 1.4x both wide open.

400 + 2x is similar to 100-300 + 2x

So if you rarely use the 1.4 on your 400 then you may consider consolidating if you use the tc a lot then may not be the best investment.

For wildlife if they will make a 200-500 f4 will be better but for sure heavier….

Nov 28, 2023 at 04:59 PM

VKM2F
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

I have the RF100-300 and just returned from a safari to Botswana where I used it extensively with the 1.4x. Not exactly what you've asked, but with the 1.4x I had zero complaints. Very impressed with the image quality and found the 140-420mm range incredibly useful.

Nov 28, 2023 at 06:22 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

Nov 28, 2023 at 08:19 PM

nmerc_photos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

RF 100-300 with 2x should not be used as a substitute for a "real" wildlife lens. I don't think anyone would suggest buying a lens (especially that expensive) if your main intent is to just dump a 2x on it for the majority of time.

As others have pointed out, it can work "okay" on close targets, but you are losing a lot of quality compared to a 400 f2.8 w/ 1.4x or naked 600 f4.

the 100-300 should be thought of mainly as a sports lens. or good for "predictable" wildlife such as when on safari

Nov 28, 2023 at 11:52 PM

Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

nmerc_photos wrote:
the 100-300 should be thought of mainly as a sports lens. or good for "predictable" wildlife such as when on safari

Really? I would bet the most common lenses used for a variety of wildlife in N. America are zoom lenses in the range of 100-600mm.

Nov 29, 2023 at 01:01 AM

Uarctos
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

Always buy the longer lens for wildlife. Even 400mm tends to be short, except for safaris or tame wildlife.

Nov 29, 2023 at 02:10 AM

crisdesign
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

I guess it depends how much you are using your 400 at 560mm and 800mm.

Do you need 800 5.6 or will you be happy to stop at 600mm?
Do you shoot with 2 bodies? Having the zoom and the prime available it’s a different proposition from having to switch teleconverter.

Personally I’m really interested in the 100-300 I’d like it to replace my 100-400ii and 500f4ii but i think I would still need to pair it with a 600+mm lens for birds. A 600 or 800mm 6.3 like nikon would be perfect but… it does not exist in canon land

Nov 29, 2023 at 07:50 AM

RobAmy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

I own the RF 100-300 and the RF 400mm also the RF 800mm. I have only used R3's with the 100-300mm. The quality with the extenders is outstanding. The 2x does not disappoint at all. The AF speed is outstanding. The reviews saying the 2x is not that great is not my finding at all. My favorite of all the lenses is the RF 400mm hands down. I am not sure I would give up that lens. That said I brought the 100-300 and the 400mm to shoot puffins and I used the 100-300 with extenders 98% of the time due to versatility. It worked flawlessly with the 2x. The weight and size is great for handholding. It has been a great travel lens getting me to 100-600mm. I want to pair the up coming RF f2.8 24-105mm with the 100-300mm also. I think that with be a great 2 lens travel kit for 24-600mm.

Personally it is a great lens and do not listen to people saying it will not work for wildlife, it certainly will. It works great for dogs also

Nov 29, 2023 at 08:16 AM

action99
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

Are you selling your RF 400 or you want to add the 100-300 and sell the 100-500?

300 + 1.4x, 392mm at F4

300 at F2.8

Nov 29, 2023 at 10:07 AM

Uarctos
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

Wow, it's disappointingly soft with the 2x wide open. The trouble with the extenders is that they work at close range, but are generally useless for small subjects in the frame. I would never exchange a 400mm lens for a 100-300mm.

Nov 29, 2023 at 10:33 AM

RobAmy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

Uarctos wrote:
Wow, it's disappointingly soft with the 2x wide open. The trouble with the extenders is that they work at close range, but are generally useless for small subjects in the frame. I would never exchange a 400mm lens for a 100-300mm.

If you're referring to my shots being soft (you're welcome to your opinion) I just do not seeing being soft at all with the 2x. I guess my expectations could be much lower than yours.

Duck in 3, 2, 1 by A & R Photography, on Flickr

Tree Swallow at Sunrise (RF 100-300mm + 2x) by A & R Photography, on Flickr

Red Bellied with jelly by A & R Photography, on Flickr

Kenzie posing in the clover by A & R Photography, on Flickr

Nov 29, 2023 at 11:30 AM

thedutt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

Rob,

Thank you for sharing your experience with this lens. Have you done any shooting with it on R5 at dawn dusk + 2x? One R5 with 100-300 & 2x (or the 1x-2x if its real), another one with 24-105 and you are right, all travel opps are covered. This is the motivation for me to get this lens, combining 100-500 & 400 into a single travel setup, abet giving up some reach & IQ.

I enjoy my 400 2.8, but even that has limitations with 2x @ 5.6 in dawn-dusk situations. I am okay with giving up a tiny bit of IQ to gain flexibility, but the YouTube reviews made it seem like you are giving up quite a bit with soft photos. I wish I had gotten mine to try out in the field last week, but luckly will get to shoot with one here in another 10 days to try out on R5 and compare with 400; TBH I think I am going to regret not having this lens on my next trip

RobAmy wrote:
I own the RF 100-300 and the RF 400mm also the RF 800mm. I have only used R3's with the 100-300mm. The quality with the extenders is outstanding. The 2x does not disappoint at all. The AF speed is outstanding. The reviews saying the 2x is not that great is not my finding at all. My favorite of all the lenses is the RF 400mm hands down. I am not sure I would give up that lens. That said I brought the 100-300 and the 400mm to shoot puffins and I used the 100-300 with extenders 98% of the time...Show more →

Nov 29, 2023 at 11:52 AM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

RobAmy wrote:
I own the RF 100-300 and the RF 400mm also the RF 800mm. I have only used R3's with the 100-300mm. The quality with the extenders is outstanding. The 2x does not disappoint at all. The AF speed is outstanding. The reviews saying the 2x is not that great is not my finding at all. My favorite of all the lenses is the RF 400mm hands down. I am not sure I would give up that lens. That said I brought the 100-300 and the 400mm to shoot puffins and I used the 100-300 with extenders 98% of the time...Show more →

Thanks for posting, Rob, I remember asking you about this and debated tagging you. You posted lots of great stuff to the 100-300 thread using tc's

Nov 29, 2023 at 11:54 AM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

Uarctos wrote:
Wow, it's disappointingly soft with the 2x wide open. The trouble with the extenders is that they work at close range, but are generally useless for small subjects in the frame. I would never exchange a 400mm lens for a 100-300mm.

That certainly makes sense if you're reach limited and always need 400mm or longer. Not everyone is in the same situation.

For decades I shot with various EF 400/2.8 versions. I dumped it the second I could get the 200-400, even though the zoom was technically inferior to the 600/4 IS v1 I also had, which I also sold ASAP. The sheer versatility and convenience, particularly the built in TC, after decades of being limited by prime lenses, won out over absolute technical quality, for MY needs (and those of my clients, for whom I could deliver a greater variety of images).

If anything, my only gripe with the 100-300 (which admittedly I do not have) is the loss of convenience of an internal TC.

RobAmy wrote:
If you're referring to my shots being soft (you're welcome to your opinion) I just do not seeing being soft at all with the 2x. I guess my expectations could be much lower than yours.

This is a problem with technically centered forum discussions. Of course we all want the sharpest lens possible (most of the time), but 'real world' use of a given lens in a range of scenarios has a way of tempering those expectations due to both equipment limitations and photographer limitations. So it probably boils down to: what is good enough for you? If you pixel peep every image at 200%, you're bound to have a different opinion about a lens than someone who views their photos differently, like the full image on-screen, or at normal print viewing distances, etc.

So here the OP will get a range of opinions from 'terrible' to 'outstanding' and really the only way they will know if it works for them, is to buy it and use it (or borrow one again).

Nov 29, 2023 at 12:01 PM

alundeb
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

The only problem with the 100-300 is that it doesn't make an 800 mm like most other options do.

Nov 29, 2023 at 12:03 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

thedutt wrote:
I enjoy my 400 2.8, but even that has limitations with 2x @ 5.6 in dawn-dusk situations. I am okay with giving up a tiny bit of IQ to gain flexibility, but the YouTube reviews made it seem like you are giving up quite a bit with soft photos. I wish I had gotten mine to try out in the field last week, but luckly will get to shoot with one here in another 10 days to try out on R5 and compare with 400.

Let us know how it works out for you.

Nov 29, 2023 at 12:04 PM

thedutt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Canon 100-300 f2.8 with 2x for wildlife vs 400 2.8 RF?

action99 wrote:
What kind of wildlife are you shooting?
Birds? Mammals? Safari? Local?

100-300 2.8 with 1.4 is sharper than 100-500 both wide open.

100-500 is a tad sharper than 100-300 + 2x both wide open

100-300 + 2x is sharper than 100-500 + 1.4x both wide open.

400 + 2x is similar to 100-300 + 2x

So if you rarely use the 1.4 on your 400 then you may consider consolidating if you use the tc a lot then may not be the best investment.

For wildlife if they will make a 200-500 f4 will be better but for sure heavier….

action99 - thank you for providing such a great summary. My dream is to have a 2 lens travel setup for all kinds - brids / mammals/safari; For local, I think I will keep the 400 or perhaps swap it for 600. I do use TC a lot, but do shoot 400 bare often enough as well, depending on the situation. I am also curious about the 200-500...

---------------------------------------------

VKM2F wrote:
I have the RF100-300 and just returned from a safari to Botswana where I used it extensively with the 1.4x. Not exactly what you've asked, but with the 1.4x I had zero complaints. Very impressed with the image quality and found the 140-420mm range incredibly useful.

My friend, you are not helping

. My upcoming tiger safari trip to india is the motivation!

---------------------------------------------

AmbientMike wrote:
plenty of excellent photos using tcs in this thread. Might not be as good as 600/4 needing no tc certainly looks great though.

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1803942/16

Mike, thanks for sharing the link.
---------------------------------------------

nmerc_photos wrote:
RF 100-300 with 2x should not be used as a substitute for a "real" wildlife lens. I don't think anyone would suggest buying a lens (especially that expensive) if your main intent is to just dump a 2x on it for the majority of time.

As others have pointed out, it can work "okay" on close targets, but you are losing a lot of quality compared to a 400 f2.8 w/ 1.4x or naked 600 f4.

the 100-300 should be thought of mainly as a sports lens. or good for "predictable" wildlife such as when on safari

thanks for sharing your advice.
---------------------------------------------

Uarctos wrote:
Always buy the longer lens for wildlife. Even 400mm tends to be short, except for safaris or tame wildlife.
thanks for sharing your advice.
---------------------------------------------

crisdesign wrote:
I guess it depends how much you are using your 400 at 560mm and 800mm.

Do you need 800 5.6 or will you be happy to stop at 600mm?
Do you shoot with 2 bodies? Having the zoom and the prime available it’s a different proposition from having to switch teleconverter.

Personally I’m really interested in the 100-300 I’d like it to replace my 100-400ii and 500f4ii but i think I would still need to pair it with a 600+mm lens for birds. A 600 or 800mm 6.3 like nikon would be perfect but… it does not exist in canon land

Cris, my reasoning is similar to yours - to have a 2 body wildlife travel kit. I do use 800, but would be happy at 600 if IQ is good enough. I do shoot two bodies, but often in the field it makes sense only to take one body (I was in snowstorm shooting eagles last week and many times wished I had the flexiblity of zoom, but 100-500 was too slow to focus or use).

---------------------------------------------

RobAmy wrote:
Personally it is a great lens and do not listen to people saying it will not work for wildlife, it certainly will. It works great for dogs also

. Years ago I would have said watch out using extenders but the RF extenders are just outstanding especially on the F2.8 lenses.

Here is an album for the 100-300mm

https://www.flickr.com/photos/robamyphotos/albums/72177720308762514

Here is an album for the puffin trip

https://www.flickr.com/photos/robamyphotos/albums/72177720309994419

Rob, thank you. Your photos are amazing with this lens. After posting this thread I heared back that someone cancelled and that I would be able to get this lens to try out in a couple of weeks. I think I will end up regretting passing on the one that is available today, but given its price point, I think I need to make sure it works well for me before I made the purchase.

Nov 29, 2023 at 12:08 PM

1 2 3 4 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.