Canon EF 300 F4 L IS
 

Would love the 2.8 version of this lens, but think my wife may object. Anybody got any experience of the F4 version as this may be my best hope of obtaining a Canon 300 L lens.

Hi Barry I use this lens. As you say the 300 2.8 is said to be the bees knees. Are your 2 gallery shots typical of your photography. What are you hoping to gain over the 70-200 f2.8 ?

A number of shots in my WPF gallery are taken with this lens and most of my Bird Forum gallery over the past 2 years are shot using it with or without the 1.4 TC. I tend to go for close ups and only use a fraction of the frame. I also tend to use a heavy tripod where I can and make little use of the IS. Which maybe a completely different style to your photography.

So what can I tell you ?

Hi Rob
Thanks for your advice. My interests are action/sports and landscapes and am interested in a 300mm lens for the sports/action side of things. I am becoming more involved with horse events - jumping/polocross/drag hunts - and this is where the 300mm lens would be very useful. I note what you say about not using the IS, but as I do not intend carrying a tripod, the IS has its attractions. The faster 2.8 is the obvious ideal, but £3000 is a lot of money.
Regards
Barry

Hi Barry

I had the non IS version of this lens before I dropped it and broke the AF unit. Parts no longer available - So an expensive lesson is not to buy the older non - IS versions. The non IS was a tad sharper and a bit quicker to AF.

I assume that most of your shots will be pretty well full frame. If you consider you need a minimum shutter speed of say 1/400 sec non IS hand held the IS will give you decent shots at 1/125 Sec. I find that the IS is not as good as Tripod when shooting below 1/100 Sec.

The lens is pretty good at f4 but improves nicely around f5.6 to f8. It is pretty good at tracking large moving targets but I understand the 400mm L F5.6 is much better. But no IS though. A number of Bird forum members have the 400mm and the 100-400mm.

I like the 300 f4 IS because it has a short minimum focus of 1.5m which give good magnification for close up. Also it gives decent results with a 1.4 TC if I need a bit more reach. I keep thinking about a 500mm F4 but as you say if you don't win the jack pot it is unlikely to happen.

Hi Rob
Thank you once again for your advice, which I have found extremely helpful. I am now almost certain that I will go ahead and purchase this lens, but want to make a few more final checks first.
I was interested in the 100-400mm, but did not like the push/pull zoom, preferring the more conventional twist zoom. That lens must be due an update soon, so just want to check that first.
Once again, thank you.
Barry

Hi Barry you are welcome.

To be honest I've yet to find anybody have a bad word about the 300 f4. Yes the F2.8 would be a stop faster and sharper but you also have to consider the weight.

I too considered the 100 - 400 but was put off by the mixed reviews on image quality and I know of 3 people who have had the zoom bearing jam. Fairly expensive repair. It seems that if you have a good copy then your OK but very hit and miss.

I can only say awesome. I have recently changed form Nikon (D80 + 300f4) to Canon (40D,24-105 and 300f4) and I find the 300f4 to be great. Fast, pin sharp and can be hand held even with a 1.4 converter if the light is right.