New 300mm f/4 IS L II likely

Started Aug 24, 2012 | Discussions thread
Montana500 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,094
Re: I'm still using the original 300 f4L

joger wrote:

jedinstvo wrote:
the posted images don't impress me at all except the sujet.

Most pbase images look softer to me. Could be compression. That said, I didn't notice anything wrong with the images.

Knowing the quality (images above to counter check) of the 300 f/2.8 (I & II) I have to say that the posted images from you are rather flat in contrast, not very sharp at all and lack of balanced colors - no offence but all my images have an almost 3D like look due to the huge micro contrast.

Eh. I saw your images. I wouldn't say they are any better than what jed posted.

The 300 f/4.0 is not as good as many claim - the 70-200 f/4.0 is IMHO much more attractive as a small lightweight travel lens (I own it too in parallel to the 300 f/2.8)

The 70-200 isn't very good for wildlife.

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow