Ever since I had all my camera gear- including the 500/4- stolen last year I had always planned to replace with the version II of the 500, supposedly coming out soon. The delay in release of the new lens has allowed some sober second thought and I'm looking at the 300/2.8 II. Here are the "pros"
1. Lighter and smaller, therefore more transportable on aircraft carry-on
2. Cheaper
3. Excellent IQ at least bare (no tc)
4. With 1.4x tc gives a 420mm lens at f4
5. With 2.0x tc gives a 600mm lens at f/5.6
6. Very hand-holdable and fantastic, very fast BIF lens, bare
And the cons:
1. Frequent use of 1.4 or 2x tc with resultant loss of IQ
2. Loss of 700mm and 1000mm focal lengths with 500 and teleconverters.
3. Can't think of any others!
I would appreciate people's thoughts on this, both theoretical and from folks who own the lenses in question (version I or II).
Last edited by John Chardine; 02-06-2012 at 01:18 PM.
I have the 300/2.8 II and use it when I want a light-weight alternative to the 800/5.6.
I usually have the 2X III extender on it and don't have an issue with the IQ.
With the 1.4x TC the AF speed is quite good, but it gets really slow with the 2X TC...
setting the focus limiter to the far range helps in this case (in particular for BIFs).
I have the Nikon 300 f2.8 II and the reason I bought it instead of a 500 was because it gives
me more versatility.
I use it as a bare 300 and with the 1.4 a lot.
For ducks and shorebirds, you just don't need the length where I live.
The AF is very good with the 1.4, slower with the 2x, but my skill level right now is a bigger issue!
I also live in the Northwest with a lot of dark cloudy weather and I wanted the 2.8 if I need it and I do at times.
It is easily hand holdable, the only tripod I own is a lightweight one for landscape lens.
I can also travel with a small pack, just a body, the 300 and the two extenders,
lightweight and simple.
Those were my reasons and I am happy with the decision.
Being just a hobbyist, the 300 was a couple thousand less and I get as much
enjoyment with it as I would a 500.
I looked hard at some of the really good photogs here and there are several (Daniel Cadieux and Stuart Bowie, being two)
who blow me away with a 400mm. I think learning to work a bit more and get better at fieldcraft is
part of the enjoyment for me.
I bought the "Grey" market version, I assume Canon has one as well, which saves you another thousand and
it is still warrantied by B&H.
I have both the 300 f/2.8 and 500 f/4 (not the new versions). I bought the 300 quite a few years after the 500. The specs (IMTF curves) on the new 300 look like barely an improvement over the existing 300. However, the specs on the new 500 are stunning; a near perfect lens. Among the new crop of lenses, the 500 stands out as the largest optical improvement. I sure would like the new 500, but the price is as impressively astronomical as the specs. The new 500 is also almost as light as the current 300 f/2.8.
When I travel, especially on long trips (like Africa), I'll probably only take the 300 (unless I get the new 500). The light weight of the 300 makes it so much more versatile for me as I can react so much faster to action, whether BIF or other wildlife action.
With existing TCs and the smaller pixels of the 1DIV (as opposed to 1DII or 1DIII), I find I have plenty of reach for most things I photograph. And it is possible to stack 1.4 + 2x TCs so you have 840 mm at f/8. Stacked TCs on the 300 are compared to other combinations in Figure 3 at: http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/telephoto_reach/
(there is a link to the full resolution image).
When you need the reach, the 500 is great, but the difference from the 300 is pretty small and I find myself using the 300 more and more.
As an aside regarding prices, they are cheaper in Canada for the new versions of the 300 and 400 than from major suppliers in the US, and availability seems to be better. Not sure why.
Dan- there are "grey" versions of Canon lenses available for example at B&H but the price differential is not big and the the 300/2.8II is not available in a grey version, only white!
thinking out loud Canon 300/2.8 II
Reply With Quote
