Telephoto with best quality

ales82 · Aug 21, 2014

Hello, I am looking for some advice on choosing a telephoto lens, I am quite confused.

Recently I made the "mistake" of using Zeiss lenses :-O and have been really impressed by their optical quality, really really pleasing. Even though they are MF, I am getting satisfying results. Now I am looking for a telephoto lens, at least 300mm or more of focal lenght, for wildlife and landscape photography. I would use it on Canon 6d, 7d and sony a7.

Among the many options I ended up with this pool of candidates:

Leica 280 f2.8 Apo (the older, non modular version) + adapter

Canon 300mm f4

Canon 400mm f5.6

Canon 300mm f2.8 (the non IS version)

Canon 100-400mm

Now, the Leica 280mm f2.8 Apo si quite big and heavy, the same can be said for the Canon 300mm 2.8. What about the Leica's optical performance? I did not find many info about. The Leica would be my first choice, more or less for the Apo designation and for the "name=quality" reason.

My budget is about 1500-2000 dollars, if it was more I was going directly with the Canon 300mm 2.8 IS or the Leica 280mm f4 Apo. I have used already the Canon 400mm 5.6 and found it nice but not astonishing, definitely not in the same league as Zeiss lenses. Its major advantages are probably its small size and weight.

What I am looking for is the best optical qualities (bokeh, apo correction, color fidelity, etc.), not the best AF or IS stuff.

Thanks for you opinion!

mermaidkiller · Aug 21, 2014

Forget about the 300 / 2.8L with your budget. $7000 ! Bright lenses of f/2.8 or brighter are usually extremely expensive, except the 200/2.8L ($800) but has no IS.
But the 300 f/4L costs $1400 and has IS.
The 70-300L is very good as well, but is dimmer as it is f/5.6 only @ 300, but has better IQ and IS than the 'pump' zoom 100-400L.

--
Ricoh KR-5 ... Pentax ME Super ... Canon T90 ... ... ... 40d ... 7d ... 6d

ales82 · Aug 21, 2014

Thanks, however it's not the costly 300mm 3.8 II IS I had in mind, but the older versions with NO IS, and they can be found for around 1700-2000 euros.

Sorry but in the original message I mispelled the currency, it's euro and not dollars, so my budget would turn out to be in the range of 2500 dollars/2000 euro

riknash · Aug 21, 2014

The Tamron 150-600 mm is very impressive for the price. Check it out at a local store to see if it meets your IQ standards..

jrobichaud · Aug 21, 2014

ales82 said:
Hello, I am looking for some advice on choosing a telephoto lens, I am quite confused.

Recently I made the "mistake" of using Zeiss lenses :-O and have been really impressed by their optical quality, really really pleasing. Even though they are MF, I am getting satisfying results. Now I am looking for a telephoto lens, at least 300mm or more of focal lenght, for wildlife and landscape photography. I would use it on Canon 6d, 7d and sony a7.

Among the many options I ended up with this pool of candidates:

Leica 280 f2.8 Apo (the older, non modular version) + adapter

Canon 300mm f4

Canon 400mm f5.6

Canon 300mm f2.8 (the non IS version)

Canon 100-400mm

Now, the Leica 280mm f2.8 Apo si quite big and heavy, the same can be said for the Canon 300mm 2.8. What about the Leica's optical performance? I did not find many info about. The Leica would be my first choice, more or less for the Apo designation and for the "name=quality" reason.

My budget is about 1500-2000 dollars, if it was more I was going directly with the Canon 300mm 2.8 IS or the Leica 280mm f4 Apo. I have used already the Canon 400mm 5.6 and found it nice but not astonishing, definitely not in the same league as Zeiss lenses. Its major advantages are probably its small size and weight.

What I am looking for is the best optical qualities (bokeh, apo correction, color fidelity, etc.), not the best AF or IS stuff.

Thanks for you opinion!

You just can't beat the original 300mm 2.8L non IS. It's a killer, and it's not that big. I'm not a big fan of the 300mm f4, it's good, but not the 2.8 in any regard. the 2.8 also allows you to expand your range with still better than all the others IQ with a good 1.4 or 2x.

All that being said, lens AF motor failure or DC converter failure are real issues. No one has those parts anymore, and the lens will not even manual focus without them. However, if you can find one in the 1500-1700 range, the lens will always be worth 1000-1200 non working, so your risk is not as huge as you might think. I don't think you will be as happy with the Leica as AF is an important component in "getting the shot". My second choice to the 300mm 2.8L on a budget is invest a little more and get the 300mm 2.8L IS. They can be had for under $3K and you gain IS, and repairability. Mine performs as well and in some cases better than the IS II I've tried.

Last consideration, the 70-300mm L IS is a fantastic lens and if the 2.8's are too big, or you can't find one at the right price, I would vote for the 70-300mm L. If a good 2.8 presents itself in the future, it will be easy to sell the 70-300mmL, they are hard to find used.

Best

PalmettoFellow · Aug 21, 2014

I'd get the 400mm F5.6L or the 300mm F4L IS.

bhollis · Aug 21, 2014

ales82 said:
Hello, I am looking for some advice on choosing a telephoto lens, I am quite confused.

Recently I made the "mistake" of using Zeiss lenses :-O and have been really impressed by their optical quality, really really pleasing. Even though they are MF, I am getting satisfying results. Now I am looking for a telephoto lens, at least 300mm or more of focal lenght, for wildlife and landscape photography. I would use it on Canon 6d, 7d and sony a7.

Among the many options I ended up with this pool of candidates:

Leica 280 f2.8 Apo (the older, non modular version) + adapter

Canon 300mm f4

Canon 400mm f5.6

Canon 300mm f2.8 (the non IS version)

Canon 100-400mm

Now, the Leica 280mm f2.8 Apo si quite big and heavy, the same can be said for the Canon 300mm 2.8. What about the Leica's optical performance? I did not find many info about. The Leica would be my first choice, more or less for the Apo designation and for the "name=quality" reason.

My budget is about 1500-2000 dollars, if it was more I was going directly with the Canon 300mm 2.8 IS or the Leica 280mm f4 Apo. I have used already the Canon 400mm 5.6 and found it nice but not astonishing, definitely not in the same league as Zeiss lenses. Its major advantages are probably its small size and weight.

What I am looking for is the best optical qualities (bokeh, apo correction, color fidelity, etc.), not the best AF or IS stuff.

Thanks for you opinion!

You might want to wait a few more weeks and see if the rumors of a 100-400L II come true.

Scott Larson · Aug 21, 2014

I owned the 300mm f4 for a while. I may have bad luck but it wasn't sharp wide open, however just stopping it down to f4.5 made a huge difference.

For saving money and weight, don't scoff at the 200mm f2.8. I have it and the 70-200mm f2.8 IS Mark II. If I know I'm going to be shooting only at 200mm and won't need IS, I always take this lens instead of the big heavy zoom. I feel it's as good as my 135mm f2 wide open. The lenses are indistinguishable in optical quality to my eyes.

rebel99 · Aug 21, 2014

canon 400mm f5.6 is a superb lens but you need plenty of daylight. it doesn't have IS but who cares when there is plenty of sunshine available. when lighting condition is favorable, the IQ of 400mm f5.6 rivals the canon big prime. i have most the canon big white primes and the 400mm f5.6, i can hardly tell the difference in IQ sometimes. so, for someone with low budget, i'd strongly recommend the canon 400mm 4.5 prime, if you are using it for birding and wild life purposes ;-)

cheerz.

ales82 · Aug 22, 2014

riknash said:
The Tamron 150-600 mm is very impressive for the price. Check it out at a local store to see if it meets your IQ standards..

Thanks for the adivce but I prefer to avoid lenses with such a focal lenght range and limited aperture on the longer side. I am already covered under 200mm and prefer to use a brigher and better lens for longer FL.

ales82 · Aug 22, 2014

jrobichaud said:
ales82 said:

Hello, I am looking for some advice on choosing a telephoto lens, I am quite confused.

Recently I made the "mistake" of using Zeiss lenses :-O and have been really impressed by their optical quality, really really pleasing. Even though they are MF, I am getting satisfying results. Now I am looking for a telephoto lens, at least 300mm or more of focal lenght, for wildlife and landscape photography. I would use it on Canon 6d, 7d and sony a7.

Among the many options I ended up with this pool of candidates:

Leica 280 f2.8 Apo (the older, non modular version) + adapter

Canon 300mm f4

Canon 400mm f5.6

Canon 300mm f2.8 (the non IS version)

Canon 100-400mm

Now, the Leica 280mm f2.8 Apo si quite big and heavy, the same can be said for the Canon 300mm 2.8. What about the Leica's optical performance? I did not find many info about. The Leica would be my first choice, more or less for the Apo designation and for the "name=quality" reason.

My budget is about 1500-2000 dollars, if it was more I was going directly with the Canon 300mm 2.8 IS or the Leica 280mm f4 Apo. I have used already the Canon 400mm 5.6 and found it nice but not astonishing, definitely not in the same league as Zeiss lenses. Its major advantages are probably its small size and weight.

What I am looking for is the best optical qualities (bokeh, apo correction, color fidelity, etc.), not the best AF or IS stuff.

Thanks for you opinion!

Click to expand...

You just can't beat the original 300mm 2.8L non IS. It's a killer, and it's not that big. I'm not a big fan of the 300mm f4, it's good, but not the 2.8 in any regard. the 2.8 also allows you to expand your range with still better than all the others IQ with a good 1.4 or 2x.

All that being said, lens AF motor failure or DC converter failure are real issues. No one has those parts anymore, and the lens will not even manual focus without them. However, if you can find one in the 1500-1700 range, the lens will always be worth 1000-1200 non working, so your risk is not as huge as you might think.

Lack of parts is exactly the reason I soon discarder the idea of the Canon 500mm f4.5.

jrobichaud said:
I don't think you will be as happy with the Leica as AF is an important component in "getting the shot". My second choice to the 300mm 2.8L on a budget is invest a little more and get the 300mm 2.8L IS. They can be had for under $3K and you gain IS, and repairability. Mine performs as well and in some cases better than the IS II I've tried.

Last consideration, the 70-300mm L IS is a fantastic lens and if the 2.8's are too big, or you can't find one at the right price, I would vote for the 70-300mm L. If a good 2.8 presents itself in the future, it will be easy to sell the 70-300mmL, they are hard to find used.

jrobichaud said:
Best

Thanks for the advice but I am already quite covered under 200mm and as a telephoto I prefer a prime. Anyway I will look a little more into the specs of this one.

ales82 · Aug 22, 2014

But what about the Leica 280mm f2.8 Apo? The older non modular model would be my first choice over the other possibilities I am considering. I am not interested in AF or IS, just considering its optical performances...

mermaidkiller · Aug 22, 2014

bhollis said:
bhollis said:

You might want to wait a few more weeks and see if the rumors of a 100-400L II come true.

Click to expand...

Or waiting for the 70-300L II ?
Waiting is not a good idea. When it will be announced it will take *months* before it is available in the shop and then you pay the first prize (price).

Go for existing lenses and stites like http://www.the-digital-picture.com or http://www.photozone.de show detailed views of sharpness, distortion, vignetting and extensive test reports which are rather reliable.

nzmacro · Aug 23, 2014

ales82 said:
But what about the Leica 280mm f2.8 Apo? The older non modular model would be my first choice over the other possibilities I am considering. I am not interested in AF or IS, just considering its optical performances...

Hang on a second, first off it sounded like you were looking at AF lenses, now you are saying you don't need AF, so that would mean you would be looking at the Canon FD mounts of long tele lenses. Or do you plan to buy AF lenses and turn the AF off. I'm getting confused here

What exactly are you after ??.

If you want MF Canon FD tele lenses, well I know a fair bit about them. That's mainly what I use. I do have the Canon FD 300 F/2.8L, 500 F/4.5L and the 800 F/5.6L. What I can tell you is that any Canon lens that uses a flurorite front element has absolutely no CA at all. The contrast is excellent and they are as sharp as anything out there.

300mm is too short for what I want, the 500mm is great between focal length, weight, balance and hand holding. The internal focus is smooth and fast.

You will need to be stubborn, patient and learn the techniques to nail the focus and especially on BIF's.

The Leica IMO is too short in the focal length for wildlife.

Here's what I use on a Sony NEX-7 ....

http://birdsinaction.com/index.php/Equipment

If you think its easy, you are in for a rude awakening ;-)

All the best.

Danny.

--
Birds, macro, motor sports.... http://www.birdsinaction.com

Just Kingfisher ..... http://www.flickr.com/photos/96361462@N06/

rebel99 · Aug 23, 2014

nzmacro said:
ales82 said:

But what about the Leica 280mm f2.8 Apo? The older non modular model would be my first choice over the other possibilities I am considering. I am not interested in AF or IS, just considering its optical performances...

Click to expand...

Hang on a second, first off it sounded like you were looking at AF lenses, now you are saying you don't need AF, so that would mean you would be looking at the Canon FD mounts of long tele lenses. Or do you plan to buy AF lenses and turn the AF off. I'm getting confused here

What exactly are you after ??.

If you want MF Canon FD tele lenses, well I know a fair bit about them. That's mainly what I use. I do have the Canon FD 300 F/2.8L, 500 F/4.5L and the 800 F/5.6L. What I can tell you is that any Canon lens that uses a flurorite front element has absolutely no CA at all. The contrast is excellent and they are as sharp as anything out there.

300mm is too short for what I want, the 500mm is great between focal length, weight, balance and hand holding. The internal focus is smooth and fast.

You will need to be stubborn, patient and learn the techniques to nail the focus and especially on BIF's.

The Leica IMO is too short in the focal length for wildlife.

Here's what I use on a Sony NEX-7 ....

http://birdsinaction.com/index.php/Equipment

If you think its easy, you are in for a rude awakening ;-)

All the best.

Danny.

jrobichaud · Aug 23, 2014

Danny,

You do wonderful work!!! Did you really make all those captures with manual focus? In the 70's and 80's I was ok with MF in NCAA and NFL football, but I've lost those skills now,

Great work!

Jon

nzmacro · Aug 23, 2014

rebel99 said:
nzmacro said:

ales82 said:

But what about the Leica 280mm f2.8 Apo? The older non modular model would be my first choice over the other possibilities I am considering. I am not interested in AF or IS, just considering its optical performances...

Click to expand...

Hang on a second, first off it sounded like you were looking at AF lenses, now you are saying you don't need AF, so that would mean you would be looking at the Canon FD mounts of long tele lenses. Or do you plan to buy AF lenses and turn the AF off. I'm getting confused here

What exactly are you after ??.

If you want MF Canon FD tele lenses, well I know a fair bit about them. That's mainly what I use. I do have the Canon FD 300 F/2.8L, 500 F/4.5L and the 800 F/5.6L. What I can tell you is that any Canon lens that uses a flurorite front element has absolutely no CA at all. The contrast is excellent and they are as sharp as anything out there.

300mm is too short for what I want, the 500mm is great between focal length, weight, balance and hand holding. The internal focus is smooth and fast.

You will need to be stubborn, patient and learn the techniques to nail the focus and especially on BIF's.

The Leica IMO is too short in the focal length for wildlife.

Here's what I use on a Sony NEX-7 ....

http://birdsinaction.com/index.php/Equipment

If you think its easy, you are in for a rude awakening ;-)

All the best.

Danny.

--
Birds, macro, motor sports.... http://www.birdsinaction.com

Just Kingfisher ..... http://www.flickr.com/photos/96361462@N06/

Click to expand...

LOL...danny, your tiny cameras look like end cap on those behemoth primes :-D

cheerz.

I just like to think that the body adds no weight !!

Its a strange set up all right, but it works well. I shoot with quite a few Canon FF shooters and at first it was a novelty, they thought I had gone nuts, but now its just normal for them

Its like a matchbox on the end huh.

All the best.

Danny.

--
Birds, macro, motor sports.... http://www.birdsinaction.com
Just Kingfisher ..... http://www.flickr.com/photos/96361462@N06/

ales82 · Aug 23, 2014

nzmacro said:
ales82 said:

But what about the Leica 280mm f2.8 Apo? The older non modular model would be my first choice over the other possibilities I am considering. I am not interested in AF or IS, just considering its optical performances...

Click to expand...

Hang on a second, first off it sounded like you were looking at AF lenses, now you are saying you don't need AF, so that would mean you would be looking at the Canon FD mounts of long tele lenses. Or do you plan to buy AF lenses and turn the AF off. I'm getting confused here

What exactly are you after ??.

No, I am looking for the best optical quality regardless of AF, MF, IS, or else, as I wrote in the original post:

"What I am looking for is the best optical qualities (bokeh, apo correction, color fidelity, etc.), not the best AF or IS stuff."

I am simply looking for the best (optically) lens in the 300-400mm range with my budget, if it's MF, then be it, if it's AF, it's a bonus.

nzmacro said:
If you want MF Canon FD tele lenses, well I know a fair bit about them. That's mainly what I use. I do have the Canon FD 300 F/2.8L, 500 F/4.5L and the 800 F/5.6L. What I can tell you is that any Canon lens that uses a flurorite front element has absolutely no CA at all. The contrast is excellent and they are as sharp as anything out there.

300mm is too short for what I want, the 500mm is great between focal length, weight, balance and hand holding. The internal focus is smooth and fast.

Here is an issue, weight vs focal lengh. I used in the past an old Nikon 500mm ai-p, all MF but for hiking/trekking it was quite a pain, also because with a big lens comes a big tripod, tripod head and big backpack. Talking about FD lenses, did you changed the original mount to the EOS one or did you use an adapter? I was told the Canon adapter FD to Eos takes its toll on image quality.

nzmacro · Aug 23, 2014

jrobichaud said:
Danny,

You do wonderful work!!! Did you really make all those captures with manual focus? In the 70's and 80's I was ok with MF in NCAA and NFL football, but I've lost those skills now,

Great work!

Jon

Every single shot is with the old MF Canon legacy lenses Jon. I don't own any AF lenses, I do have a kit 18-55 somewhere though. I live for the challenge Jon, that's what drives it I guess. Sports is fun as well and I still cover power boat racing here. Not a lot of money in it, but it pays for the gear and that's about it. I would love to have a crack at the NFL. The Canon FD's with the internal focus are still darn smooth and quick Jon.

All the best up there Jon and appreciated thanks. Now I just want to see exactly what the OP means and wants. I'm still confused by his posts

;-) AF or MF.

Danny.

jrobichaud · Aug 23, 2014

nzmacro said:
jrobichaud said:

Danny,

You do wonderful work!!! Did you really make all those captures with manual focus? In the 70's and 80's I was ok with MF in NCAA and NFL football, but I've lost those skills now,

Great work!

Jon

Click to expand...

Every single shot is with the old MF Canon legacy lenses Jon. I don't own any AF lenses, I do have a kit 18-55 somewhere though. I live for the challenge Jon, that's what drives it I guess. Sports is fun as well and I still cover power boat racing here. Not a lot of money in it, but it pays for the gear and that's about it. I would love to have a crack at the NFL. The Canon FD's with the internal focus are still darn smooth and quick Jon.

All the best up there Jon and appreciated thanks. Now I just want to see exactly what the OP means and wants. I'm still confused by his posts ;-) AF or MF.

Danny.

Telephoto with best quality

Member

Senior Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Member

Member

Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Member

Forum Pro

Member

Forum Pro

Member

Keyboard shortcuts