A keeper

[Clumsyfingers]

Very happy with this lens. Sharp, quick focus, and I absolutely love the sliding hood. Like any relatively high end equipment, it takes work to get to know how to use it, but I'm amazed at the pictures I can capture hand-held, low light with my EOS 6D.

I bought this as a cheaper alternative to the EF 70-200 f2.8l IS II and still plan to get that eventually. Obviously they are 2 different lenses, but I'm not having any regrets with having this lens in my upgrade path. It's a keeper!

 

[Anthony Perera]

I have a 6D and an opportunity to purchase a 300mm L lens for a decent price. I'm looking more for astronomy than animal tracking. Have you used this for taking pics of the moon/stars?

 

[BlueRay2]

yeah, this is a phenomenal lens....i use mine with my 1Dx and couldn't be happier! although, my newly acquired 100-400 II isn't a slouch, either! i am very impressed by both. those who say they are not in the same league, you should try both ;-)

 

[Clumsyfingers]

Sorry for my tardy reply, I haven't been to this site in a while. I don't do much astronomy pictures, but I have done a few moon pictures, and am quite pleased. Here is my favorite.

F/8, 1/250 sec, ISO 640, Spot metering

 

[Dave]

I love shooting the moon and am curious to see how much better the results will be with a DSLR.

Shot on tripod in Michigan

Shot handheld in South Africa

Shot on monopod in Botswana

 

[Martin B K]

Hi,

I am seriously considering to by either 300 mm F4 or the new 100-400 II to be used for mainly birds photography. I am using a 7D but can surely use all the focal length I can get as long as the quality is good. I expect to ad a 1.4 externder to the 300 mm for that.

What lens would you suggest with regard to image quality ? - so 300 mm with 1.4 ext (or without extender but cropped) vs 100-400 using max focal length.

I will mainly operate in f5.6-f8 (and f4 if/when possible).

 

[hotdog321]

That's a great lens, but I kinda lean towards the flexibility of the new 100-400 II.

 

[Martin B K]

Thanks, yes more flexible, but if you are willing to give up flexibility for image quality is the 300 mm better then or are they very close to equal ?. I am already the happy owner of a 70-300 lens but when shooting birds it is 'locked' at 300 mm anyway.

 

[jitteringjr]

Hi,

I am seriously considering to by either 300 mm F4 or the new 100-400 II to be used for mainly birds photography. I am using a 7D but can surely use all the focal length I can get as long as the quality is good. I expect to ad a 1.4 externder to the 300 mm for that.

What lens would you suggest with regard to image quality ? - so 300 mm with 1.4 ext (or without extender but cropped) vs 100-400 using max focal length.

I will mainly operate in f5.6-f8 (and f4 if/when possible).

As far as sharpness, if you stop the 300/4 IS down to the max aperture of the 100-400 II at 300mm, then it looks to be a wash.

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens Image Quality

View the image quality delivered by the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens using ISO 12233 Resolution Chart lab test results. Compare the image quality of this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

I am too trying to pick between those two. The 300/4 IS is 2/3 stop faster at 300mm and a lot lighter. So when I do astro photography the extra speed is nice and the lighter weight will probably help my sky tracker track better.

The other uses would be Zoo/wildlife and outdoor soccer. I have been looking at a lot of field sports type pictures of lenses in these focal lengths and f5.0 at 300mm seems to leave a lot of the background still too clear for my liking unless its framed really tight. I would really want a 300/2.8 but the wife would kill me. 300/4 seems to get at least better speration, but gives up the flexibility of the 100-400 II. The money saved on the 300/4 IS over the 100-400 II would be nice to use on other photography related upgrades too.