Canon 300mm F/4 L Prime

[f0xy]

I have borrowed one of the latest versions (IS USM) from a friend for a couple of weeks to try it out before I possibly consider buying one.

I have previously owned other L series lenses, although the only other telephoto was a 70-200mm F/4 L. It was a great lens, but I only ever used it on my old body years ago (350d), and I had the chance to sell it on at a profit so I did.

The 300mm prime seems to be in a different leauge in terms of sharpness and focus, although I'm now on a 40d body. Its mainly going to be used for sports (and motorsports), to which it seems fit for purpose so far. Its not too heavy and I can hand hold it for a day without much issue - I have tried the F/2.8 version before and that got really heavy after a while.

Anyone got one, or used one before? If so... any comments or opinions?

 

[GeordieClioDriver]

Yes I own one.

Took this with it...

Very happy with it! nice and light and very sharp!

P.s That was with the non IS version too

 

[PinkoCommie]

Yes I own one.

Took this with it...



Very happy with it! nice and light and very sharp!

P.s That was with the non IS version too

That's a stunning pic.

 

[Christopher]

Looks like a Tie-Fighter! LOL.

Awesome pic.

 

[dunganick]

That photo is genuinely one of my favourite ever photos.

Its a good lens, albeit a bit old now, but it will be perfect for your needs.

Possibly also consider a Sigma 100-300 F4, mine served me well for years. And it will give you some flexibility.

 

[f0xy]

Excellent photo!

What sort of price difference does the Sigma carry compared to the Canon prime with regards to second hand?

 

[dunganick]

I sold my Sigma 100-400 F4 EX DG HSM (the top spec model) about 2 months back for £475 on TP]

An example of a photo taken with the Sigma and a 40d

 

[Xanda73]

I have the Nikon 300mm f/4 AFS, so though I can't comment on the Canon, as a concept they are wonderful for isolating your subject, as the 2 fantastic pics above show. They are also easily hand holdable, and very sharp. I use mine wide open most of the time. I did buy mine whilst still using film where fast glass is probably more of an advantage than with digital, due to cleaner images at high (>100) ISO, so it may not be worth the extra price over a 300mm F/5.6 zoom. I love mine, but I'm not sure I'd buy it again now I shoot digitally, and that would be the only concern - price.

 

[f0xy]

Thanks for the info everyone - I had a play with it today @ Oulton Park, there has been a Porsche Club day on. Found it very easy to get used to, still need practice as always though!

 

[SamP]

Had a play around with a 300 2.8 today for a wee bit, can safely say I'd happily 'waste' the 3.4k on one. Image quality is meant to be similar, and if you say it feels nice then get on it and buy it right now

 

[dunganick]

Nothing wrong with those photos at all. Nice and sharp, buy it!

The 300 2.8 IS is lovely, just lots of money given the performance shown above for under £500. The 300 2.8 IS really isn't worth 6x that.

 

[f0xy]

And a fair bit heavier, lol.

It seems really nice, although I cant really get along with the focus at the moment (with regards to the switch between 1.5m or 3m). It seems to make little difference with some shots, but others lots.

Also (It might just be me) the photos seem to be lacking something, whether they need better panning or slight adjustments in the settings when being shot im not sure, cant really put my finger on it..

 

[dunganick]

feel free to forward some on to me and i will take a look and see if i can work out whats causes the lack of 'something'

The 1.5/3m setting would only effect the lens in minimum focus distance. It will also speed up the time it takes to come back to focus if the lens seeks.