300 f2.8 IS L II plus 2x Mk.III better than 100-400 f4.5/5.6 IS L?

Started 3 months ago | Discussion thread
joger
Senior MemberPosts: 1,857
Like?
Re: 300 f2.8 IS L II plus 2x Mk.III better than 100-400 f4.5/5.6 IS L?
In reply to borno, 3 months ago

borno wrote:

Olga Johnson wrote:

birdbrain wrote:

It should be but is there anyone using the new 300 f2.8 with the MkIII 2x converter? I was wondering what the IQ and AF were like, worse or better than the 100-400?

Is the 300 MkII easy to hand hold?

Any input would be gratefully received.

I can say that my 300L f/2.8 IS (original version) + 2x II is better than my 100-400L. So the combo that you refer to has to be even better than that.

--

Olga

This is my experience as well, but with the 2x vi and 2x viii. the 100-400mm is very good though.

but rather (unacceptable) slow.

What most forget is that you start at f/5.6 with the 70-300 and the 100-400 at 300 mm - so adding a 1.4x or 2x is getting you to an unacceptable AF speed (if it works at all)

But without the 1.4x and 2x extender the investment in a 300+ lens is not suitable for traveling - at least for me - I really like the idea of a good 600 f/5.6 lens. The current cabin restrictions speak agains a 600 f/4.0 setup.

If you stay at your local turf exclusively things might be different though.

You prefer to have a f/2.8 or f/4.0 lens over a slow zoom to avoid being slow even though you've got a good camera.

--
__________________________________
isn’t it funny, a ship that leaks from the top
ISO 9000 definition of quality: 'Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements'
I am the classic “Windows by Day, Mac by Night user'
“The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view.” Albert Einstein

Edited 3 months ago by joger
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow