Is it worth buying new?

Adam-T · Mar 10, 2004

The Big Bad said:
Are you really sure you have no need for IS ?

She can handhold a lens steadier than anyone bar JaJa of belgium Digital - believe me, Daniella has a built in IS system !

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

EOS-1D - Sigma SD9 - Canon G5

michael177376 · Mar 10, 2004

full warranty from manufacture and it's fresh...However, I'd buy used one if it is still in good condition (no dent, dust or scratch).

good luck.

Daniella said:
I was considering this. I can buy a new lens for 1200$ and if I
resell it on ebay I will get back about 750$ or 800$, maybe 900$ at
most.

Or I can buy a used one in excellent condition for 700$ for a 300mm
F4L and use it to my heart contant and then resell it on ebay for
about the same price..so..

Is it worth buying new??? hmmmm..any thoughts?

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

Daniella68313 · Mar 10, 2004

but it's slow focusing right? how manageable is it for takin birds in flight? is the focusing on the 100-300 L F5.6 fast enough?

I want to use it whith the 1.4x Tamron TC as well.

Adam-T said:
Adam-T said:

the 100-300L to the 300 F4L for sharpness?

Click to expand...

the 300F4L (Non-IS) is actually sharper at F4 than the 100-300L is
wide open at F5.6 - saying that though, I use the 100-300L far
more, it's smaller, lighter, easier to carry and a Zoom so more
convenient..

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

EOS-1D - Sigma SD9 - Canon G5

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

Daniella68313 · Mar 10, 2004

well, most of my shots will be with fast shutter speed, maybe 2% will be slower shutter. Should I still go for IS? I can find the IS version brand new with all accessories for 1129$ whereas the non IS version is used 750$ no warranty except 60 days from keh and no accessories what so ever. Not sure what's best. with the brand new I could get a 3 years pro lens extended warranty from Mack for 28$ which would give me 4 years warranty. I could resell the lens later if I would be financialy in need for about 1,100.00 on ebay...tough choice.

I know when I was face to face with the bobcat, I would have died for IS then

but that is very rare.

the non IS is rated 4.3 whereas the IS is only 3.4?? that is a lot different.

The Big Bad said:
Daniella said:

I want the non IS version. it si lighter and sharper and I have no
need for IS.

Click to expand...

Are you really sure you have no need for IS ? Also do you have any
real proof that the non IS version is that much sharper ? I have
often heard tons of people say this and the basis of it seems to
result from an unreliable photodo review of the two lens where the
IS version is rated very low for some reason, way lower than it
should be for a lens of its class.

Ive seen no hard proof from anywhere shoing the non IS version
looking any sharper, the view reviews i have seen always show them
to be the same for all intensive purposes

You hear the same with the 70-200 2.8 IS and non IS. some people
claim the non IS is sharper and then other people such as Stefan
will tell you their IS verison is shaprer than any of their copies
of the non IS verision.

Now thats talking about the overall tripod mounted absolute
sharpness of the two. Lets talk about relative sharpness. As
you know, I had a 400 5.6 prime a while back, the sharpest L prime
around in the non supertele class.

If i put it on my tripod and used MLU it was in fact sharper than
my lowly 100-400L. Not a big surprise there, prime beating a zoom
and all right ?

Well when I shot both handheld and tested them, the differences
were negated, and in fact with a 1.4x TC the 100-400l was always
sharper, the prime couldnt produce anything due to shake. This
was on an afternoon with decent light about 3pm

Now at midday when both len were getting 1/100th the story is a bit
more in favor of the prime. Depends on what time of day you
shoot. For me, and my skill level, a poorer quality 100-400L at
1/250th at 400mm with IS turned on is alot sharper of lens than a
400 prime at 1/250th at 400. as they say, your milage may vary

Now if you look through most of my shots, Im always at about
1/125th and usually iso 400 or 800. Thats just what a 5.6 lens
seems to get with non direct sunlight. I cant shoot at 1/125th
handheld. Some people can but not me.

Thats one of the reasons I returned my 50-500ex. Took a few trips
to the zoo with it and couldnt get sharp shots due to shake. The
bright sunlite shots were great of course as its a great lens. But
my subject matter is usually in non direct light or shade. Became
a very poor lens for that.

Now I think before you make any judgements on if you need IS or
not, wait til you try out the lens. Go into it with an open mind
regarding IS. Lets face it, some people that done have IS versions
of a lens simply tell themselves they dont need over and over.
Now for some of those people its fully true, for others its wishful
thinking and they are just trying to fool themselves.

If your going to use the lens just in good lighting, tripod mounted
or for birds in flight and other action, then NO I dont think you
need IS at all, it would be of no use for you.

Im under the impression that you, like myself, do enjoy shooting at
zoo's sometimes. That typically means not much good lighting, and
trioods are a pain. Give your new lens a trail under such
situations and see if f4 is giving you enough shutter speed.

It very well could be fast enough to give you sharp shots, people
have taken great photos without IS for years. But people have had
blurred shots due to shake for years as well.

So get the lens and try it as much as you can. If your getting
some shots with shake, then maybe its not right for you. You paid
what, like $740 i think you said and with no tripod collar ?
Fair price if the lens works for you, but dont forget you can find
the IS version for not much more. The copy I had a few weeks ago
I bought for $850 with a collar, UV filter and it was rated at the
local shop as 9++, basicaly new in the box. If i had known you
were looking I would of let you know it was availbile when I
returned it. but thats an average used price for them

So just try it out and then form an opinon. A good friend of mine
who's shooting alot of wildlife out west once told me he had "no
need for a lens longer than 200mm" and now he owns a 600 f4, the
non IS version but it just goes to show how what we think we need
at one time can vastly change.

http://www.pbase.com/bigbad

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

Daniella68313 · Mar 10, 2004

I thought L lenses did not had chromatic aberation but it has more than my Sigma 70-300...that was a surprise. it is less at F5.6 and down. It is sharp F4.5 and a little softer at F4 but not that much and with a little USM the difference is not really visible.

Oh surprise! it came with the original tripod mount..a 150$ bonus

I thought it did not had the tripod mount for that price.

I need to do more test tomorrow as the light now is too low, even for F4. The only thing I am worry about is the chromatic aberation. Is that normal for L lenses?

it is a 300mm F4 non IS. yes it is big and hard to hold at 300mm so I might get a monopod.

weirdrob · Mar 10, 2004

Bob Roy said:
Are you aware that the 10D's focus sensors a quite a bit larger
than the focus rectangles on the screen. As was explained here
sometime ago, if there is insufficient contrast in the middle of
the sensor, it searches outward for something to focus on. If you
had the focus sensor on the womans face with the edge not far from
the man's face, it is quite concievable that the 10D picked up on
the contrasty edge of the man's face since the woman's face is
somewhat flat contrast wise. There are all kinds of threads on this
subject in the archives.

weirdrob said:

Daniella said:

I was considering this. I can buy a new lens for 1200$ and if I
resell it on ebay I will get back about 750$ or 800$, maybe 900$ at
most.

Or I can buy a used one in excellent condition for 700$ for a 300mm
F4L and use it to my heart contant and then resell it on ebay for
about the same price..so..

Is it worth buying new??? hmmmm..any thoughts?

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

Click to expand...

300/4 IS L...used...eBay...$800...BIN...and I did.

But it won't focus with my 10D...

Click to expand...

http://www.pbase.com/image/25835922.jpg

Bob Roy said:

--
Rob Wierman
http://www.pbase.com/weirdrob/root

Click to expand...

--
Bob Roy

I'm sorry...that was said TIC (tongue in cheek)...as a joke.
That shot was with my 10D.
Focus was right where I wanted it...fast and accurate, as usual with this lens.
You can see the man didn't shave that morning...!!

Another...
10D, 300/4 IS L, 1/250s at f/5.6 iso200

--
Rob Wierman
http://www.pbase.com/weirdrob/root

StephenL196092 · Mar 10, 2004

A used Canon 300 f4 L just sold on ebay this evening for $1,136.00 US! That's more than new at some places.

It seems that mint "L" lenses are selling within $100.00 of new B&H prices.

Stephen

Daniella said:
I was considering this. I can buy a new lens for 1200$ and if I
resell it on ebay I will get back about 750$ or 800$, maybe 900$ at
most.

Or I can buy a used one in excellent condition for 700$ for a 300mm
F4L and use it to my heart contant and then resell it on ebay for
about the same price..so..

Is it worth buying new??? hmmmm..any thoughts?

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

Daniella68313 · Mar 10, 2004

no not really. this lens is quite big and I find it harder to handhold. It is just because of the nature of my photography that I am not sure that it is worth for me to pay 1100$ to get IS with a brand new lens. The best I can say at this point is that I will be trying it tomorrow and see how it does without IS. It is much bigger than my Sigma 70-300.

Adam-T said:
Adam-T said:

Are you really sure you have no need for IS ?

Click to expand...

She can handhold a lens steadier than anyone bar JaJa of belgium
Digital - believe me, Daniella has a built in IS system !

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

EOS-1D - Sigma SD9 - Canon G5

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

Daniella68313 · Mar 10, 2004

The Big Bad said:
Ive never really seen any threads about someones 'bad" copy of
their 28-105 for example.

I had one exactly of this lens. sold it when I saw the result with the 300d. it was ok but not much.

The Big Bad said:
That my mainly be due to the fact that the consumer buyer gets a
lens and goes and shots with it. The L lens buyer gets it home and
shoots rulers and looks at the shots at 200% for weeks on end.

The one that I just received seems to have some fuzz inside or some smearing. I don't think I will keep it. it resolve more detail than with my Sigma but it has CA and the Sigma does not. hmm maybe the CA is caused by the haze inside. not sure if that is fungus or what else.

here is the canon with the Tamron 1.4x TC, indoor with flash wide open at 1/200s:

and the Sigma with the Tamron 1.4x TC, indoor with flash wide open at 1/200s F5.6:

Surely the L lens with the TC resolved more detail and the 300 F4L can focus no problem what so ever with the TC indoor whereas the Sigma indoor with the tc need to be used in manual focus as it can't focus in that low light witht the TC.

I also noticed that the noise is more apparent with the Canon at ISO 400 when the photo is underexposed as it seem to resolve a lot more detail in everything, so is noise.

The Big Bad said:
Maybe if consumer lens buyers did that we'd hear about alot more
"bad" copies

Alot of it is user error of course and unrealistic expectation.
Someone goes and buys a $1000 lens with their new camera beacause
they've seen good shots. They dont know anything about photography
and the lens must not work because their shots dont look right.
SELL IT ! GOT TO GET SOMETHING MORE EXPENSIVE ! thats the rally
cry right LOL

So alot of peoples problems as to why they are selling a lens are
just user error. If i got that same "bad" copy perhaps I could do
great things with it.

I actually have to say I like those rumors on the 'net. People
taking a fine lens, and because its rumored 'soft" wide open or
something they sudeenly decided it became no good.

I need to start a rumor about bad CA on the 300 2.8. maybe some
people would start ditching them and I could pick one up cheap.

You do have to watch out though sometimes. People will often get
rid of a lens for that reason. Its not working right, theres no
warrnety, it would cost a few hundred to repair, why not just sell
it for a $50 loss and buy a new one ?

"seling it AS IS, but its always worked fine for me, although I
know nothing about it really" A line like that just leads to
trouble
--
http://www.pbase.com/bigbad

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

Daniella68313 · Mar 10, 2004

that was the IS version and I can buy that one brand new for 1,129.00..USA model with full warranty. Go figure

the one that was sold on ebay only has 30 days warranty.

StephenL said:
It seems that mint "L" lenses are selling within $100.00 of new B&H
prices.

Stephen

Daniella said:

I was considering this. I can buy a new lens for 1200$ and if I
resell it on ebay I will get back about 750$ or 800$, maybe 900$ at
most.

Or I can buy a used one in excellent condition for 700$ for a 300mm
F4L and use it to my heart contant and then resell it on ebay for
about the same price..so..

Is it worth buying new??? hmmmm..any thoughts?

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

Click to expand...

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

The Big Bad · Mar 10, 2004

Heavy things til you get used to them. The 300 f4 is 2.6lbs i believe and it just gets heavier from there. YOu really do get used to the weight though. Your 300D probably felt heavy to you at first too and now im sure it just feels comfortable and "right"

As for CA, it just depends, any lens can have CA under certain situations. Really the question is do you shoot under conditions that produce CA, more than if the lens has it.

Theres also sensor blooming thats a common problem as well, similar effect to CA

Take it out shooting tommorow and get a real idea of how it works for you, you should be pretty impressed id think.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bigbad

Daniella68313 · Mar 10, 2004

lets just say that I don't see that one bit with the Sigma, even wide open.

The Big Bad said:
Heavy things til you get used to them. The 300 f4 is 2.6lbs i
believe and it just gets heavier from there. YOu really do get
used to the weight though. Your 300D probably felt heavy to you at
first too and now im sure it just feels comfortable and "right"

As for CA, it just depends, any lens can have CA under certain
situations. Really the question is do you shoot under conditions
that produce CA, more than if the lens has it.

Theres also sensor blooming thats a common problem as well, similar
effect to CA

Take it out shooting tommorow and get a real idea of how it works
for you, you should be pretty impressed id think.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bigbad

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

The Big Bad · Mar 10, 2004

Daniella said:
lets just say that I don't see that one bit with the Sigma, even
wide open.

I guess taht APO lens is a real good performer when it comes to a lack of CA, but its probably not as good of performer at 300mm otherwise so maybe they traded some sharpness for lack of CA. Im not a lens designer and dont really understand to much the fine details of optics so im not going to try to figure out whats going on.

The L should be faster and sharper with better AF, better color and better contrast though. I would of guessed it should have better lack of CA, i know L's are really good with CA, but ive never had a 300 f4

some good lens get CA though, my 120-300 zoom got it pretty bad

Wait til you try some birds with it etc and then judge it after you see how it works "in the field"

some lens suck indoors doing test shots but once you get them out in actual use you really start to love them

http://www.pbase.com/bigbad

Kai Hui · Mar 10, 2004

Maybe someone just don't know how to search on internet, maybe someone never heard about BH, ADORAMA, 17TH STREET, ETC.

For me, I would not consider any used equipment unless it is at least 30% cheaper than a new one. Yeah, I am talking about used one in absolutely mint condition. But this just me.

Kai

StephenL said:
It seems that mint "L" lenses are selling within $100.00 of new B&H
prices.

Stephen

Daniella said:

I was considering this. I can buy a new lens for 1200$ and if I
resell it on ebay I will get back about 750$ or 800$, maybe 900$ at
most.

Or I can buy a used one in excellent condition for 700$ for a 300mm
F4L and use it to my heart contant and then resell it on ebay for
about the same price..so..

Is it worth buying new??? hmmmm..any thoughts?

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

Click to expand...

--
I am a newbie in photographing. Some of my not-so-great shots are here:
http://www.pbase.com/kaihui

Adam-T · Mar 11, 2004

Daniella68313 said:
but it's slow focusing right? how manageable is it for takin birds
in flight? is the focusing on the 100-300 L F5.6 fast enough?

it IS slow focussing and not a lens I'd use for action shots like that, if it has to hunt about it takes AGES, if the lens is in the ball park, it's usable but to be honest, I usually use it for architecture and compressed street shots. Optically it's superb and a bargain but AF speed is NOT it's strong point..

Daniella68313 said:
I want to use it whith the 1.4x Tamron TC as well.

Forget that unless you're a fan of manual focussing or have a 1D, the 10D doesn't like focussing at F8 unless in very good light, I have the Tamron 1.4 and don't use it on the 100-300L, it's fine on the 300F4 though as it becomes F5.6 with the TC on..

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

EOS-1D - Sigma SD9 - Canon G5

Adam-T · Mar 11, 2004

Daniella68313 said:
trying it tomorrow and see how it does without IS. It is much
bigger than my Sigma 70-300.

the 300 F4 non-IS is a lot heavier than the Sigma (about 1.3Kilos), the 100-300L isn't much heavier or bigger but focusses at about the same speed (more accurate though, less front / rear focussed shots)

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

EOS-1D - Sigma SD9 - Canon G5

Daniella68313 · Mar 11, 2004

yes I will do that first thing today

can't wait!

I see some haze inside, fungus? not sure. But it looks like the element inside has some tiny coat of grease not even, like if it was badly cleaned and some smearing remained. hmm not sure I'll keep it. There is also some little scatch one some spots but those are small. anyway at 740$ I was expecting the glass to be very clean. I will probably return it and try to find a better copy. maybe I will buy new at 1,129$ with IS. I can resell it about the same price with a Mack warranty in a year or 2 more than likely.

Unless they would go very much down in price, which I doubt. I am also considering the new DO lens. not sure how this will perform. I should take my time. Maybe the new DO will make the value of the L lenses go down in price?

The Big Bad said:
Daniella said:

lets just say that I don't see that one bit with the Sigma, even
wide open.

Click to expand...

I guess taht APO lens is a real good performer when it comes to a
lack of CA, but its probably not as good of performer at 300mm
otherwise so maybe they traded some sharpness for lack of CA. Im
not a lens designer and dont really understand to much the fine
details of optics so im not going to try to figure out whats going
on.

The L should be faster and sharper with better AF, better color and
better contrast though. I would of guessed it should have better
lack of CA, i know L's are really good with CA, but ive never had a
300 f4

some good lens get CA though, my 120-300 zoom got it pretty bad

Wait til you try some birds with it etc and then judge it after you
see how it works "in the field"

some lens suck indoors doing test shots but once you get them out
in actual use you really start to love them

http://www.pbase.com/bigbad

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

Daniella68313 · Mar 11, 2004

valid point. I am starting to think that people with mint condition lenses prefer to sell them on ebay and people with less than perfect and beaten up lenses will sell them on Keh and places like that. The one I received from Keh is not excellent condition. the glass is not clean. haze inside and scratches or finish scratches. Some dust inside the lens as well. So not sure I can trust Keh grading anymore.

Kai Hui said:
For me, I would not consider any used equipment unless it is at
least 30% cheaper than a new one. Yeah, I am talking about used one
in absolutely mint condition. But this just me.

Kai

StephenL said:

It seems that mint "L" lenses are selling within $100.00 of new B&H
prices.

Stephen

Daniella said:

I was considering this. I can buy a new lens for 1200$ and if I
resell it on ebay I will get back about 750$ or 800$, maybe 900$ at
most.

Or I can buy a used one in excellent condition for 700$ for a 300mm
F4L and use it to my heart contant and then resell it on ebay for
about the same price..so..

Is it worth buying new??? hmmmm..any thoughts?

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
I am a newbie in photographing. Some of my not-so-great shots are
here:
http://www.pbase.com/kaihui

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

dry · Mar 11, 2004

...all exept my 50/1.8 are used (80-200/2.8L, 28-80/2.8-4L, 20-35/2.8L) and performing great for all photography I'm doing. Even my D60 is used (changed my 300D + 100 euros to get it).

dry

gregL281 · Mar 11, 2004

It really sounds like you might have gotten a dud. I have never noticed much CA at all with either version of the 300mm f/4L. In fact I can't recall a single picture I have taken with one that had noticeable CA in it. If there is haze in the lens then you definitely have a problem. Do you see anything inside that looks like little hairs?

Greg

Is it worth buying new?

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Leading Member

Keyboard shortcuts