Reading mode: Light Dark

Any thoughts on 300mm f/4L IS?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Imp
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
I

Imp

Guest
Does anyone have this lens? How about a quick review? :-) I'm considering this lens vs the 100-400mm IS. The 300mm is approx. $200 cheaper than the 100-400mm and both have IS. However the 300mm can still autofocus when used w/TC 1.4x.

I know that the 100-400mm has gotten a lot of good reviews (and more versatile), but I would like to hear about the 300mm. Is it sharper than the 100-400?

The IS version has a lower photodo rating than the one w/o IS, but I want the IS badly :-)

Thanks again.
 
Imp said:
Does anyone have this lens? How about a quick review? :-) I'm
considering this lens vs the 100-400mm IS. The 300mm is approx.
$200 cheaper than the 100-400mm and both have IS. However the 300mm
can still autofocus when used w/TC 1.4x.

I know that the 100-400mm has gotten a lot of good reviews (and
more versatile), but I would like to hear about the 300mm. Is it
sharper than the 100-400?

The IS version has a lower photodo rating than the one w/o IS, but
I want the IS badly :-)
Click to expand...
I bought the 300/4 IS a few years ago and have been very happy with it. My problem was one of versitility. Many times I found myself with too much focal length and no time to change lenses. I do a fair amount of nature photography and I can't tell you how many times I lost a shot because my subject moved in too close. The 100-400 answered those problems and more. Now I can mount-up the 100-400 and be confident knowing I can handle a wide-range of subject distances. The 100-400 by itself still beats the 300+1.4.

Optically both these lenses are super. Yes, the lens charts show a few tenths rating here and there but in the real world no one can tell the difference. I only wish the 100-400 had the built-in lens hood like the 300/4.

-- John
 
The F4 is sharper. I shot some night baseball with the 1.4
extender and the color/contrast were incredible.
John said:
Imp said:
Does anyone have this lens? How about a quick review? :-) I'm
considering this lens vs the 100-400mm IS. The 300mm is approx.
$200 cheaper than the 100-400mm and both have IS. However the 300mm
can still autofocus when used w/TC 1.4x.

I know that the 100-400mm has gotten a lot of good reviews (and
more versatile), but I would like to hear about the 300mm. Is it
sharper than the 100-400?

The IS version has a lower photodo rating than the one w/o IS, but
I want the IS badly :-)
Click to expand...
I bought the 300/4 IS a few years ago and have been very happy with
it. My problem was one of versitility. Many times I found myself
with too much focal length and no time to change lenses. I do a
fair amount of nature photography and I can't tell you how many
times I lost a shot because my subject moved in too close. The
100-400 answered those problems and more. Now I can mount-up the
100-400 and be confident knowing I can handle a wide-range of
subject distances. The 100-400 by itself still beats the 300+1.4.

Optically both these lenses are super. Yes, the lens charts show a
few tenths rating here and there but in the real world no one can
tell the difference. I only wish the 100-400 had the built-in lens
hood like the 300/4.

-- John
Click to expand...
 
I bought the 300mm f4 IS as soon as it was released and have been very happy with it. I am a full time photojournalist and I use it as a "bag lens" for when I need long glass and don't feel like carrying, or don't have handy the 300 f2.8 or 400 f2.8. It is a useful lens with the IS and the built in hood, too. I have not found it lacking in sharpness...except in conditions where it was caused by operator error. I have hand held it as slow at 1/8 on a dcs 520 with really exceptional results.

If I had to do it over again, I'd still buy it in a hot second!

--Fred

Fred Greaves
Photojournalist
Southern California
http://www.fredgreaves.com
 
I'm also debating between the same two lenses and I am interested in the 300m f/4 because I suspect with a 2x teleconverter it will be sharper than the zoom with a 1.4x teleconverter. Any opinions on that?
 
Here's what I like about the 100-400 which you may see as an advantage:

You can hold it at the 100mm end of zoom to follow a subject then suddenly push it to 400mm before you take the shot... Sometimes it's REAL difficult to frame a telephoto prime lens, especially for small or fast moving subjects.
Imp said:
Does anyone have this lens? How about a quick review? :-) I'm
considering this lens vs the 100-400mm IS. The 300mm is approx.
$200 cheaper than the 100-400mm and both have IS. However the 300mm
can still autofocus when used w/TC 1.4x.

I know that the 100-400mm has gotten a lot of good reviews (and
more versatile), but I would like to hear about the 300mm. Is it
sharper than the 100-400?

The IS version has a lower photodo rating than the one w/o IS, but
I want the IS badly :-)

Thanks again.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top