Canon 300 f/4 L IS Review

This is my favorite and most used lens that I own. With a 1.6x crop body it makes an excellent wildlife lens, similar to a 500mm f4. It handles like a dream, is built like a tank & has all the feature boxes ticked (IS, focus limiter, sliding hood, USM). There is one problem ITS OLD, because it was enginered 17 years ago it has only 2 stop IS & optically could improve (very good on it's own & decent with 1.4x).

See my much longer review on my website: http://www.sheridanphoto.com/?page_id=1531

Jay

no way. I've owned two copies of the 300L f4 it's a okay lens but long in the tooth. the 500L is stunning.  I much prefer the 100-400L or the 70-300L.

I was by no means comparing the 300mm f/4 with the outstanding 500mm f/4 I or II.  I was just mentioning how the field of view is similar for the 300mm when attached to 1.4x converter (480mm equivalent).  I have owned the 100-400mm also and found the 2 lenses similar in many aspects but I really appreciate the extra light of the f/4 aperture.

Jay

technic wrote:

Nice review on your website (with nice pictures), matches most of my experience with the lens. I don't agree with your opinion on the AF performance and the 'exceptionally sharp' though. When I compare it with the (much cheaper) 2.8/200L the 300IS is by far the weaker of the two IMHO, both in image quality (especially sharpness throughout the frame) and AF speed. Maybe I was lucky with my 200L or unlucky with my 300L? I still consider it a good lens and good value for money, thanks to the close focus distance that makes it my number 1 dragonfly lens.

But that 'value' is mostly because there are no real alternatives at the moment, this lens really needs a makeover. If the price for a II version goes up to $2000-2500 that would still be acceptable for me assuming the optical quality is close to the last 2.8 version. The 2.8/300IS II is too expensive for most hobby photographers and too heavy to handhold for a longer time. I'm hoping for a more affordable 2.8/300IS from Sigma (still a rumor though) but probably that will also weigh at least 2.5 kg and close focus to 1.5m is unlikely for the Sigma

Thanks for taking a look, I really enjoyed putting my experiences into words.

My lens is really sharp on its own and decent when combined with the 1.4x converter. I think due to the age of the lens there is some variation in performance form copy to copy. See the reviews below that show it's resolution similar to the 200mm f/2.8 L II. The 200mm lens has an small advantage when set to the same aperture. As for the AF I stand behind my observations. I have used better lenses like the 70-200, but in decent light I am rarely disappointed. When trying to AF in really poor light performance takes a considerable hit.

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/170-canon-ef-200mm-f28-l-usm-ii-test-report--review?start=1

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/172-canon-ef-300mm-f4-usm-l-is-test-report--review?start=1

I think that an updated version of the lens would cost right around your estimate $2200 and the old lens would still be a great value at $1350 USD or less used. The outdated IS would be my biggest grip about the current lens and I would consider buying an updated version of this lens as I use it already so much. Sigma may introduce a 300mm f/2.8 but that would not interested me as it would weigh more than twice my f/4 lens.

Jay

I totally agree on your analysis.  There is a drop in resolution when the 300 is focused to infinity.  I noted this in my review as well, but I am almost never using the lens at these focal distances.  Wildlife and other critters need to be closer than 50m or there is no point taking photos anyway.

Jay

It's a nice lens and I love it.

Although it is not very sharp and fast compare with the other canon prime lens.

but it's sharp and fast enough, with IS, good building quality and reasonable price.

Nice to see this lens getting some attention. It is the one I started nature photography with and I still love it. Light, fast, sharp, close focussing - wonderful!

Cuban Tody - Canon 30D and 300mm f/4 Lens

brightcolours wrote:

jason sheridan wrote:

I was by no means comparing the 300mm f/4 with the outstanding 500mm f/4 I or II. I was just mentioning how the field of view is similar for the 300mm when attached to 1.4x converter (480mm equivalent). I have owned the 100-400mm also and found the 2 lenses similar in many aspects but I really appreciate the extra light of the f/4 aperture.

Well, it actually is more like a 500mm f6.4. Not f4.

(300 x 1.6 = 480, f4 x 1.6 = f6.4)

Jay

The 300mm f/4 does acts like a 480mm f/6.4 only for depth of field on a 1.6x crop camera. As for shutter speed and field of view it acts more like a 480mm f/4 (close enough to a 500mm f/4). I personally find I am often wanting more focal length and higher shutter speed, while narrower depth of field is not something I am often wanting for my telephoto work. In fact I am usually trying to balance keeping shutter speed high enough while maintaining adequate depth of field. Not having to stop down as much is actually an advantage, but this is made up for with a full frame camera with better ISO performance and higher resolution.

Jay