Pixalo Photography Community

Go Back   Pixalo Photography Community > Photography Forums > Cameras, Lenses and Accessories

Cameras, Lenses and Accessories: Discuss Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS...Guys and Gals, Bit of a dilemma.....wanting to purchase longer lens for some sports. Mostly Rugby League and some motor ...
Welcome to the Pixalo Photography Community. As a Guest you are free to browse the site, but see what extras you get as a Member here.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 13-05-2007, 23:35   #1 (permalink)
Quite Chatty
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 98
Bundybear will become famous soon enoughBundybear will become famous soon enoughBundybear will become famous soon enoughBundybear will become famous soon enoughBundybear will become famous soon enough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

Guys and Gals,

Bit of a dilemma.....wanting to purchase longer lens for some sports. Mostly Rugby League and some motor sports. Have read reviews/comments re these two lens.....but cant decide. Originally I was leaning towards the 100-400mm, till I read Rob's review on the 300mm. I am thinking with the 100-400mm I will have a bit of an overlap with the 70-210 f/2.8L. I would like to use a 1.4x TC on the 300mm. Has any lucky bugger got both or has had both to compare and what sort of stuff did you use it for and would you purchase it again?

Other equipment already purchased:
30D
10-20mm sigma
24-70mm f/2.8L Canon
70-210mm f/2.8L IS Canon.
Bundybear is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2007, 23:44   #2 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
dabhand16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dunstable Bedfordshire UK
Posts: 30,257
dabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of light
dabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

If you are looking to use the 300 with a TC, have you found out if you will retain the AF function, or are you 'not bovvered'?

Personally, with regard to the overlap on the 100-400 and your 70-210, look at my face. Is it bovvered? (to help you out in this text only reply, it is not bovvered).
dabhand16 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2007, 08:10   #3 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
stepheno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bingley
Posts: 10,668
stepheno is a jewel in the rough
stepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the rough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

Cheaper still is to put a 1.4x converter on your 70-210. That will give you nearly 300mm. I have the 100-400 for sport (mainly soccer) and prefer the ability to change the zoom. A fixed 300mm wouldn't do me at all unless I had a second camera....and in your shoes I wouldn't worry about the overlap with a 100-400. HTH
stepheno is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2007, 08:51   #4 (permalink)
P-E
Part of the furniture
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sheffield, S.Yorkshire UK
Posts: 12,250
P-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to all
P-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to all

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

I was only looking at this lens myself yesterday

So be interested to see the replies in here but I agree with stepheno in that the prime would have to be on a second body for me.
P-E is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2007, 17:32   #5 (permalink)
Getting Comfy
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 174
ChrisRabior will become famous soon enoughChrisRabior will become famous soon enoughChrisRabior will become famous soon enoughChrisRabior will become famous soon enoughChrisRabior will become famous soon enoughChrisRabior will become famous soon enoughChrisRabior will become famous soon enough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

I would get the 100-400, purely out of the zoom capability. I hate being limited by primes, and the extra reach would be a fine addition to my kit.

Now, as you have the 70-210 f/2.8, a 1.4 TC will essentially become 98-294mm f/4. A 2x TC will push you to 140-420 f/5.6. I guess it depends more on what you want. The 100-400 will probably give you better results than your 70-210 with a 2x TC, and be a bit more flexible with aperture.

The 100-400 definitely gets my vote.
__________________
Canon EOS 30D & 40D | EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
EF 28-135mm IS | Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 | SIGMA 18-50mm f/2.8 DC Macro | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 Di LD | 135mm f/2.8
Manfrotto 3021BPRO w/ 804RC2 pan/tilt head | Manfrotto 697B w/ 3229 head
Check out my website www.ChrisRabior.com or my collection on Alamy
ChrisRabior is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2007, 23:24   #6 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
Whipspeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Northamptonshire
Posts: 3,134
Whipspeed is a jewel in the rough
Whipspeed is a jewel in the roughWhipspeed is a jewel in the rough

No Image editing
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

For rugby, the 100-400, it's a cracking lens & overlaping with the 70-200 as dabhand says, am I bovvered It's a great lens.
Whipspeed is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 21-05-2007, 22:44   #7 (permalink)
Forum Regular
 
gsgary's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chesterfield UK
Posts: 1,287
gsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whipspeed View Post
For rugby, the 100-400, it's a cracking lens & overlaping with the 70-200 as dabhand says, am I bovvered It's a great lens.
Sorry don't agree the 300F4 blows the 100-400 out of the water for Rugby i have used my friends before he got rid, most rugby league start at 3.00pm the second half F5.6 will not cut it, I sold my 300F4 2 months ago for 380 wish i had kept it even though i bought the 300F2.8

30oF4 non is Doncaster V Widnes


300F4 + 1.4x Cricket
gsgary is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 21-05-2007, 22:53   #8 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
dabhand16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dunstable Bedfordshire UK
Posts: 30,257
dabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of light
dabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

Quote:
Originally Posted by gsgary View Post
Sorry don't agree the 300F4 blows the 100-400 out of the water for Rugby i have used my friends before he got rid, most rugby league start at 3.00pm the second half F5.6 will not cut it

Good point there Gary - I can't deny that i would not have even thought about this, but then again, I don't shoot this sort of stuff. I guess it is the sort of thing that only expreience would make you aware of.
dabhand16 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 21-05-2007, 23:05   #9 (permalink)
Forum Regular
 
gsgary's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chesterfield UK
Posts: 1,287
gsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dabhand16 View Post
Good point there Gary - I can't deny that i would not have even thought about this, but then again, I don't shoot this sort of stuff. I guess it is the sort of thing that only expreience would make you aware of.
At the Sheffield Eagles i am at iso3200 F2.8 1/640 in the second half

gsgary is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2007, 09:06   #10 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
stepheno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bingley
Posts: 10,668
stepheno is a jewel in the rough
stepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the rough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

Gary, I see from your exif that you used the 300mm f2.8 in the last shot? That is not a fair comparison with the 300mm f4 since one costs 3,000 and the other costs 870. I agree that it probably is true that a prime will beat a zoom at the prime's focal length but you will pay a lot more. As I have said it depends on the individual's preference. In my case I prefer the flexibility of the zoom and will stand the slight loss in IQ.
stepheno is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2007, 21:05   #11 (permalink)
Forum Regular
 
gsgary's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chesterfield UK
Posts: 1,287
gsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

Quote:
Originally Posted by stepheno View Post
Gary, I see from your exif that you used the 300mm f2.8 in the last shot? That is not a fair comparison with the 300mm f4 since one costs 3,000 and the other costs 870. I agree that it probably is true that a prime will beat a zoom at the prime's focal length but you will pay a lot more. As I have said it depends on the individual's preference. In my case I prefer the flexibility of the zoom and will stand the slight loss in IQ.

No 200mm, first half i used the 300F4 but then it got too dark, it is just to show you need a fast lens to shoot rugby league in the second half
F5.6 will not cut it, i would always go for the fastest lens i could afford
gsgary is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2007, 21:33   #12 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
stepheno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bingley
Posts: 10,668
stepheno is a jewel in the rough
stepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the rough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

Quote:
Originally Posted by gsgary View Post
No 200mm, first half i used the 300F4 but then it got too dark, it is just to show you need a fast lens to shoot rugby league in the second half
F5.6 will not cut it, i would always go for the fastest lens i could afford
Understood and I agree about the fastest lens you can afford. If I could afford to I would have both
stepheno is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2007, 21:34   #13 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
Rob Barron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Poole, Dorset
Posts: 7,227
Rob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to all
Rob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to all

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

I have both the 100-400mm and the 300mm f4 prime (as per my reviews) and can only say that comparing like for like, you get what you would expect: at 300mm, the prime is clearly sharper. A prime lens will almost always have the edge and given that this is f4 instead of f5.6 as in the zoom, you have an extra stop of light to play with as well. They are both IS lenses of course so they both benefit from the ability to handhold at speeds well below the usual 1/focal-length that we would normally aim for.

Obviously the 100-400mm is more versatile, that's the whole point of it. It's swings and roundabouts but the zoom gives you more framing options. However, in my experience, when people are using the 100-400mm they tend normally to be using it at the last 100mm so from 300-400mm rather than at the short end (obviously there are exceptions to that).

I have both a 1.4x TC and a 2x TC, the former gets plenty of use, the latter very little use. A loss of two stops is a bit too much to live with most of the time, especially if using the zoom as you then need enough light for f11 as minimum which is pretty restrictive.... unless you live in sunnier climes than most of us do.

But hey, these are all L series lenses we're talking about and you have to look pretty darned closely to see weaknesses in picture quality with any of them. But I must agree with Stepheno, comparing the 300mm f4 with the 300mm f2.8 is pointless and unfair. I can understand that anyone who has paid their 3,000 for the f2.8 wants to tell the world they have got it, I would too! But the price difference is at such a difference that we are talking about an entirely different market. Very few people considering the 300mm f4 are in the market for the f2.8 except in their dreams!

Have to say though, you let your 300mm F4 go too cheaply gsgary. People will happily pay over 500 for a good condition second hand one and rightly so. Frankly you won't get mine off me for anything..... except a swap for the f2.8 of course

Cheers,
Rob
__________________
Rob Barron

I love being a photographer: it's the only job where you can legally shoot people and cut their heads off
Rob Barron is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2007, 23:10   #14 (permalink)
Forum Regular
 
gsgary's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chesterfield UK
Posts: 1,287
gsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Barron View Post
I have both the 100-400mm and the 300mm f4 prime (as per my reviews) and can only say that comparing like for like, you get what you would expect: at 300mm, the prime is clearly sharper. A prime lens will almost always have the edge and given that this is f4 instead of f5.6 as in the zoom, you have an extra stop of light to play with as well. They are both IS lenses of course so they both benefit from the ability to handhold at speeds well below the usual 1/focal-length that we would normally aim for.

Obviously the 100-400mm is more versatile, that's the whole point of it. It's swings and roundabouts but the zoom gives you more framing options. However, in my experience, when people are using the 100-400mm they tend normally to be using it at the last 100mm so from 300-400mm rather than at the short end (obviously there are exceptions to that).

I have both a 1.4x TC and a 2x TC, the former gets plenty of use, the latter very little use. A loss of two stops is a bit too much to live with most of the time, especially if using the zoom as you then need enough light for f11 as minimum which is pretty restrictive.... unless you live in sunnier climes than most of us do.

But hey, these are all L series lenses we're talking about and you have to look pretty darned closely to see weaknesses in picture quality with any of them. But I must agree with Stepheno, comparing the 300mm f4 with the 300mm f2.8 is pointless and unfair. I can understand that anyone who has paid their 3,000 for the f2.8 wants to tell the world they have got it, I would too! But the price difference is at such a difference that we are talking about an entirely different market. Very few people considering the 300mm f4 are in the market for the f2.8 except in their dreams!

Have to say though, you let your 300mm F4 go too cheaply gsgary. People will happily pay over 500 for a good condition second hand one and rightly so. Frankly you won't get mine off me for anything..... except a swap for the f2.8 of course

Cheers,
Rob
The 300F4 i sold was a 1995 Non IS and that is the going rate, it is also sharper than the IS model, my 300F2.8 is a 1992 model and cost 1700, If you are shooting fast sports IS is a waste of money because it does not work over 1/250 i think, so if Bundybear is shooting mostly rugby league he would be better off getting the non is 300F4
gsgary is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 30-05-2007, 13:50   #15 (permalink)
Quite Chatty
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 98
Bundybear will become famous soon enoughBundybear will become famous soon enoughBundybear will become famous soon enoughBundybear will become famous soon enoughBundybear will become famous soon enough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

Good food for thought, Gary didnt know that about the image stabaliser not working over 1/250th can anyone confirm this???? Apreciate veryones comments and thoughts, At this stage I think im lean more towards the 300 f/4. Although the 100-400 would be a bit more versatile.
Bundybear is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 30-05-2007, 15:58   #16 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
stepheno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bingley
Posts: 10,668
stepheno is a jewel in the rough
stepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the roughstepheno is a jewel in the rough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

My 100-400 IS works at 1/500 all the time
stepheno is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 30-05-2007, 23:37   #17 (permalink)
Forum Regular
 
gsgary's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chesterfield UK
Posts: 1,287
gsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enoughgsgary will become famous soon enough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM with TC Vs 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 L USM IS

Quote:
Originally Posted by stepheno View Post
My 100-400 IS works at 1/500 all the time
At 1/500 you shouldn't need IS
gsgary is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WTD - Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR Lens Dave Photography Classified Adverts 3 02-04-2007 09:39
80-400mm Arkady Cameras, Lenses and Accessories 2 29-11-2005 10:23
Sigma Release 135-400mm-DG Matty News 3 23-11-2005 20:48
Canon 300mm L Glass Liberalis Photography Classified Adverts 8 22-08-2005 12:13
Canon EF100-400mm L IS USM Image Stab.Lens. CT Cameras, Lenses and Accessories 13 31-03-2005 13:25


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:59.


vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
ReviewPost & PhotoPost vB3 Enhanced, Copyright 2003-2014 All Enthusiast, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.0
Copyright 2006 - 2017 Pixalo.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197