I've seen this a couple times. Mine is definately sharper at f/8 than it is at f/5.6, even hand-held ... which means the exposure is twice as long. Could I have a slightly bad copy?
From the one IS and one non IS 300 I've used, the non IS version is sharper at f/4 than the IS is at f/5.6. The old version of this lens just doesn't need to be stopped down for sharpness, period. I'm giving some thought to sending the new lens back and getting the old one. I'm using the lens for wildlife, mainly, and trying to weight blazingly-fast sharpness against IS and a 1:4 macro focus...
I have this wonderful lens and its brilliant. I took these two
shots with the lens, the first without my Signa 1.4xTC and the
second with (both ISO 400)
and
Other images using this lens can be found at
http://www.pbase.com/sheila - go to Candid and Faces sections
Cheers
Sheila
--
Sheila Smart
Canon D60: Canon EF300/f4 L IS; Canon EF28-105 USM, Canon EF70-200
L f/4 USM; Canon EF20-35 3.5/4.5, Canon EF 50 f/1.8, Sigma 1.4xTC;
Kenko tubes
http://www.pbase.com/sheila/galleries
http://www.shutterfreaks.com/gallery/Sheilas-gallery
One crowded hour of glorious life is worth an age without a name -
Thomas Osbert Mordaunt
I have no doubt. But the thing is, the 300 mm f/4 L non IS also kicks the 300 mm f/4 L IS's fanny, at least under f/8.I've done comparisons of the 300mm f/4.0L non-IS and the 75-300mm
IS. The 300mm kicks 75-300mm fanny
Generally, I agree. But I'd like to offer the inverse focal lenght rule: wide angles should always be used from a tripod, partly for DOF, but mostly because they need to be stopped down heavily for sharpness. And because wide-angle subjects typically aren't moving, this is of course possible. Telephotos, on the other hand, will show the same effect ( "a tripod is your sharpest lens" ), but they really aren't meant to be used from a tripod. They're big, heavy, and demand a much more rigid base. They're long, and can't be used on a 'pod without mirror lockup ... which is next to impossible with the subjects I bought my 300/4L for. Finally, it's the teles that include IS, which ( at least below 500 mm or so ) will make your images softer on a tripod.
I've been thinking of them as regular lenses, and using the double FL rule; this lens should require 1/600th, and my 100/2.8 Macro should require 1/200th. And I'm doing a lot of testing to see how IS affects things in different situations; I think I can go down to about 1/200th or so and still expect really sharp images.
Which MTFs? Canon's seem to show only f/8 and wide-open ( f/4 in this case ), but they're also based on theoretical performance of the design, and not on actual lens resolution tests.
According to EXIF, the aboriginal was f/5 at 1/2000 sec. The elderly man at f/5.6 at 1/320 and the little girl, which was very heavily cropped as she was part of a group of children was f/11 at 1/50 sec. All were at ISO 400.
Not if you're handholding itI have no doubt. But the thing is, the 300 mm f/4 L non IS alsoI've done comparisons of the 300mm f/4.0L non-IS and the 75-300mm
IS. The 300mm kicks 75-300mm fanny
kicks the 300 mm f/4 L IS's fanny, at least under f/8.
Since I use the WA's in sufficent light, I've not had this problem. Here's a morning light example. Remember, the image has been cut from 360 dpi down to 120 dpi for Web posting.
The church was very kind and stood still a moment for me while I took the image
Then it was goneSure they can, if you're not pushing the image by either blowing it up to a 20"X30", dropping the shutter speed down to under 1/3rd of the FL or using a floppsy tripod
Now you've created a conundrum
Tele's need support and mirror lock up but I can't use mirror lockup and pods to shoot the subject matter I bought the lens forAll lenses with IS will be softer then their non-IS counterparts but IS will offset mirror slap
Sounds like it's time to break out that monopod
So I have to lean back against something, find a support or wedge myself somehow and/or carry my monopod about. It's a really nice tool once you've adapted to it.It's well known how much those extra two elements flapping about at the front of the lens will break an image up and by stopping down that extra stop, you're pushing the lens into the sweet spot.
As you commented about the tripod being your sharpest lens, give the wonderful monopod a try.
I think that you're super critical and wouldn't give a lens an even break
Compare a 300mm IS image to an equal image from what you might consider your favorite lens. Tripod mount, no shutter lock up, with IS on. Swap out the 300mm and place your fav lens on the sensor body, post process each image the same, 100% crop, print and compare. You'll have your answer.The convenience factor. Image quality Vs Image convenience
Closest focusing distance is 8.25' and magnification is 0.13. This according to a Canon EF sheet for the non-IS version.
not trying to be judgemental here!--Mishkin wrote:
They were both shot at Circular Quay, in Sydney. The aboriginal is
a street performer and one of my favourite subjects. This shot was
not posed. He just looked up and I snapped him! The second is a
"gentlemen of the road" (a homeless guy) also taken at the Quay.
He was a moving target which does not faze this wonderful lens.
The next shot is heavily cropped taken with the 300 (again with
the Sigma 1.4x TC) of a little girl watching the street performer
laying on a bed of nails
--
Sheila Smart
http://www.pbase.com/sheila/galleries
http://www.shutterfreaks.com/gallery/Sheilas-gallery
One crowded hour of glorious life is worth an age without a name -
Thomas Osbert Mordaunt
Sorry, rules of street photography require short lenses as you have to be involved in the street scene. Long lenses qualify as vourism, a different sort of photography
People seemed surprisingly comfortable with my presents. I think it's because I was on the corner so long that they came upon the scene with me already there and they came into my world as opposed to my coming into their world. I think it makes a difference as to how you view the situationBut it does. You can tell the images apart by looking at them at 100% ... which is important if you print. ( In the sun, 1/2000th or faster isn't difficult. )Not if you're handholding it
I hope not; my 50/1.4 and 100/2.8 are clearly better until the 300 gets to f/8, and the non IS 300 seems much better until it's replacement gets to f/8, too. For landscapes this isn't a problem; as long as I can get good results at some aperture and some ISO, I'm happy. But chasing wildlife is another story... Still, I hope this isn't too much to expect of a $1,200 prime, but if it is, it's sharp when I can get it stopped down a bit, so I can live with that.Me thinks you might be getting overly expecting of your lenses
Yeah. In theory, I guess it's the same, right? The old lens doesn't need to be stopped down, at all, for sharpness. The new lens needs two stops down to be really sharp, but it has IS, so in theory you get those two stops back. And you still have f/4, only now it's an "emergency mode."The convenience factor. Image quality Vs Image convenience
