New MKII super telephot lenses

[arash_hazeghi]

Has anyone got the new 400mm and 300mm MKII lenses? The Digital pictures (http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=741&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=327&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=1) (A site I believe associated with Canon) has posted MTF samples from the new 400mm MKII. While the bare lens looks nice it looks noticeably softer than the old one with 1.4X and 2X MKIII TCs. OF course it is premature to conclude anything but I was wondering if someone has actually used these lenses in the field?

[Mike Tracy]

I would periodically check http://www.sportsshooter.com/. The first ones to get copies will be those covering big time sporting events.

[John Chardine]

Arash- I checked the tests and it seems that the mid-frame and corner tests are sharper on the mark II version of the 400mm lens but the centre portion is either very similar or slightly softer.

[arash_hazeghi]

Arash- I checked the tests and it seems that the mid-frame and corner tests are sharper on the mark II version of the 400mm lens but the centre portion is either very similar or slightly softer.

John I am not talking about bare lens. If you look carefully the center and corners look soft on the MKII with the TCs, note the direction of arrow and make sure you select TC III at 560mm and 800mm for the older lens (they had tested the old TCs too).

Hope to see some filed samples soon.

[arash_hazeghi]

Well he has now tested the 300 MKII, it looks sharper than the old one with the TCs, so I think he was just not careful with the focus when testing the 400 :S3:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=739&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=249&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=1

[John Chardine]

John I am not talking about bare lens. If you look carefully the center and corners look soft on the MKII with the TCs, note the direction of arrow and make sure you select TC III at 560mm and 800mm for the older lens (they had tested the old TCs too).

Hope to see some filed samples soon.

I was looking at the results with the lens stopped down a little.

[Patrick Sparkman]

Wow that lens looks incredibly sharp. At 300mm wide open at 2.8, it looks be one of the sharpest lens' out there. The surprising comparison is the 300 with 2x at 5.6 compared to the 600 prime at f4. The 300 is as sharp or sharper. If it will autofocus quickly with the 2x, this would be a great flight lens and is much sharper than the 400 DO. Now we just need the 600 to be as sharp or sharper than the 800 f5.6 at 840 and 1200.

[arash_hazeghi]

Wow that lens looks incredibly sharp. At 300mm wide open at 2.8, it looks be one of the sharpest lens' out there. The surprising comparison is the 300 with 2x at 5.6 compared to the 600 prime at f4. The 300 is as sharp or sharper. If it will autofocus quickly with the 2x, this would be a great flight lens and is much sharper than the 400 DO. Now we just need the 600 to be as sharp or sharper than the 800 f5.6 at 840 and 1200.

Pat,
I think the tester is just not careful with fine tuning his focus, I looked at samples from other lenses that I know are sharp but they look just soft in his tests. The results are not objective, my bad for posting the link-you shouldn't draw any conclusions based on these.

Hopefully we will see samples from more competent photographers soon!

[John Chardine]

I feel it's a little unfair to criticize the results provides on http://the-digital-picture.com.

I've read the methodology used to test the lenses and it seems pretty robust to me (http://the-digital-picture.com/Help/ISO-12233.aspx). The test appears unforgiving and I am sure shows up variations between lens copies as much as overall lens sharpness. That is my main problem with the test IMO- not that they are not valid but that the sample size = 1 (lens).

[arash_hazeghi]

I feel it's a little unfair to criticize the results provides on http://the-digital-picture.com.

I've read the methodology used to test the lenses and it seems pretty robust to me (http://the-digital-picture.com/Help/ISO-12233.aspx). The test appears unforgiving and I am sure shows up variations between lens copies as much as overall lens sharpness. That is my main problem with the test IMO- not that they are not valid but that the sample size = 1 (lens).

The results are still not objective, at the least he has to remove results that are obviously bad, just like removing invalid date points in an experiment-it's a no brainier.

I have shot with 600 f/4 IS many times, in fact I can get sharper shots when using the lens hand held and attached to a 1.4X TC wide open. The center looks softer than the corners in his 600 crops and the halo around the contrast edges indicate a focus issue...

I am really looking forward to the new 600, I will be really happy if it is just as sharp as the current one :S3: