Board index Photography Technical Questions Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Technical Questions

Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Discuss technical aspects of photography
dougj
 
Posts: 2276

Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Tue May 06, 2008 11:27 am


I just finished some comparisons between the EF 300/2.8 L IS, EF 300/4L IS and EF 70-200/2.8L IS at 300 & 400mm with Canon TCs.
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/gallery/lens_tests

Caution: the files are composite crops, but BIG none the less.

dharden
 
Posts: 104

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Wed May 07, 2008 12:41 am


Hi Doug

I've just bought a 300 f4 IS so was quite interested to view the test results. Considering the price difference I'd say it holds up fairly well against the F2.8 model (although just slightly softer). I've certainly been VERY impressed with it on a Sigma 1.4 EX converter mounted on a 20D body and it also works well on my 5D. I'm not going to hijack your thread with photos - if people want to have a look then I've got a few new ones in my galleries... :)

Wish I could afford the F2.8 but i've gotta say i'm very very happy with the f4 version so far - I should also thank Sheila Smart for her excellent pics from the F4.0 and her personal recommendation of the lens!

Thanks for posting that!

dougj
 
Posts: 2276

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Wed May 07, 2008 1:58 am


Hi Dave,

I really wanted to see how the 300/4 performed native and with a 1.4 TC, this would be a much lighter and manageable travel lens, at a much lower cost as well. The simple test I did indicates it does very well, better than I thought it would. The 300/4 is an excellent lens, from what I've seen it lives up to its well earned reputation.

One of the big drivers for me to get the 300/2.8 is AF speed, particularly in low light, the 300/4 is somewhat slow in this regard from what I've experienced. I need to get out and do some shooting in low light to see how it does.

I shot the 300/2.8 with a Canon 2.0 TC, although the shots look good I don't have anything to compare them with.

This is an open thread, I'd like to see some of your shots. If anyone else has something to share with any body and lens combination, please post!

dharden
 
Posts: 104

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Wed May 07, 2008 5:44 pm


Hi Doug

I did a lot of reading up before I bought the 300 F4. I was umming and ahhing between it and the 100-400. In the end I think I made the right choice for the way I shoot. "Native" I think the 300 is excellent and I've so far been really impressed with it on the converter (which I already owned). The AF is great too - I was following swimming Voles with it, which my previous lenses never could manage. It seems to follow birds in flight quite well too but I'm no expert and haven't managed to test it in that area properly yet. However my stepson is doing an Owl flying session on Saturday at a falconry..... 8)

Here are a couple of pics I got at the weekend. I ended up with more "keepers" than I've ever had in the past. One day i'll get everything uploaded! :lol:

First two are with the converter and the last one is without.....

Image
Image
Image

dougj
 
Posts: 2276

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Wed May 07, 2008 11:17 pm


Those are great shots Dave. The narrow DOF is really nice, but a bit tricky to get the focus right, the vole's eye is nice and sharp.

Here are 2 of mine with the 300/f4, the first is with the 1.4TC and the second without.

Image

Image

I added 2 more lens testing files, these are shots of a bank note at 12 ft., 300 & 420mm. The resolution of the 300/f4 compares very well with that of the 300/f2.8 at close distance as well as far. I took a few shots at 600mm, but the 300/f4 is at f8 and AF is disabled so I could only manual focus. The 30D focusing screen is pretty poor for manual focus, and the DOF is only 1/4 inch. Only one shot was in focus, but it compared well with the 300/f2.8 at 600mm. I think at more reasonable distances it might be OK at 600mm, but manual focus is tricky.

moffetb
 
Posts: 154

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Thu May 08, 2008 6:54 pm


One thing I discovered, and this may be just me, I had a hard time manually focusing my 100-400 w 1.4 teleconverter on my Digital Rebel XT (not full-frame). I would occasionally get a good shot, but most of the time I wouldn't. Once I put it on a monopod or tripod, my focus got much better. I was using IS when it was not on the tripod, and no IS when it was on the tri/monopod.

I suspect for me, I just was not able to lock onto an area to focus with the image moving like it was. IS does help, but I think it was not quite good enough for my eyes.

Just a thought if you do some testing and find focus problems. Make sure it's not you (as it was me) that was the problem.

Brian

PS Nice photos.

dharden
 
Posts: 104

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Thu May 08, 2008 9:39 pm


Doug: Thanks for the compliments! Some great shots from yourself too! Sharp eyes all round! 8)

Maybe it's because I had to work so hard with my previous lenses but I actually found the 300 f4 comparitively easy to get it right with. As Brian quite rightly points out, very often a misfocused shot is down to the user rather than the camera but with the new lens, even on the converter, my hit rate has rocketed! Also, the ones that I miss now I usually have an inkling about even before I view them. With the previous big lenses I've tried on the 20D the focusing was erratic to say the least. I had the body calibrated by Canon, which did help a bit. Maybe that's why it's now so good with the 300 F4? What I also like is that they were all handheld - not had it on the tripod yet! :)

I personally find the 20D screen fairly useable for manual focus (not as good as the 5D though :) ). It does get harder as the light drops, of course. Brian, I guess that at an effective F8 max aperture then you are going to struggle in less than ideal light, both with visibility for MF and with shutter speed for freezing movement. There's also a chance I guess that you may have been seeing a slight motion blur as well as or instead of missed focus? (thanks for the input and the positive feedback, btw!)

I'll try it out with moving birds (hopefully) at the falconry this weekend then next week, if I can get up particularly early before work, I want to try and get over the hill to Chatsworth House (famous UK stately home, if you don't already know) to see if I can get some pics of the Deer herds on the estate. Thing is they only ever seem to be around when I DON'T have the camera in the car! :)

dharden
 
Posts: 104

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Thu May 08, 2008 10:09 pm


Just had a look at the indoor test. The 2.8 really does visibly pull ahead in this test. f4 version still does a good job, mind! It's interesting that the outdoor pics didn't show as much of a difference....

I also note that the 2.8 does very well with the 2x converter fitted?

dougj
 
Posts: 2276

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Thu May 08, 2008 10:54 pm


As Brian points out, focus problems frequently are caused by the user. Also, AF at F8 on a non-series 1 body is difficult. Canon says the design of the AF sensors is such that apertures smaller than f5.6 produce an image that does not adequately cover the AF sensor extremes, so AF is hit or miss.

When Canon introduced the 10D, a lot of folks moved from fixed lens digicams to the 10D, and there were many posts on DPR about focus problems. There were a few misbehaving bodies and/or lenses, but most of the difficulties were user induced - shallow DOF compared to a P&S means less room for error, and the 10D AF sensors are 3-4 x larger than the markers in the viewfinder and they like contrast. I found focus locking onto higher contrast background areas that were near the sensor marks.

MF on the 30D is a challenge for me, the focus screen is just not bright enough or have enough detail. I understand there are 3rd party focus screens available that offer some improvement, but I'll stick to AF whenever possible.

dougj
 
Posts: 2276

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Thu May 08, 2008 11:19 pm


Dave, you're right, the difference between the 2 lenses becomes more pronounced with the indoor shots. I think the bank note has finer detail and is a better poor man's resolution test. The f4 version does excellent as expected, and does a very respectable job with the 1.4 TC fitted. The 600mm shots look OK, I need to get outside and shoot some birds to see the detail.

Here are 2 shots @ 600mm, the first is from the f2.8 lens and the second from the f/4 lens (manual focus), both at f/8 and same tripod, MLU, etc. as the rest of the tests.

300/2.8 @600
Image

300/4 @600
Image

Consider that the f2.8 lens is stopped down 1 stop, and the f4 lens is wide open, and the DOF is about 1cm. The f/4 did reasonably well in defending its honor.

dharden
 
Posts: 104

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Mon May 12, 2008 5:37 pm


Hi Doug

the more I use the 300 f4 the more I like it! Very easy to get on with in portrait format too (all handheld still!). Not had chance to upload anything yet but it did pretty well at the owl flying session (apart from me not being able to get a shot of the Little Owl that landed on my head at one point!). They were a bit close in less than ideal light for trying to track them (i'm not that good anyway!) but on the whole it was just the tool for the job.

i'll get some pics online as soon as I can!

Your examples do show what a top lens the 300 2.8 is, but it's certainly WAAY beyond my current budget! :D

cheers

Dave

dharden
 
Posts: 104

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Tue May 13, 2008 11:30 pm


Got a few pics from the Owl flying day uploaded now. I shot RAW + JPEG but these are all JPEGs, resized to 800 x 532 or similar, and I haven't touched the RAW files yet. I love this lens! :D

Image
Image
Image

dang
 
Posts: 3780

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Wed May 14, 2008 3:54 am


Doug said:
As Brian points out, focus problems frequently are caused by the user. Also, AF at F8 on a non-series 1 body is difficult. Canon says the design of the AF sensors is such that apertures smaller than f5.6 produce an image that does not adequately cover the AF sensor extremes, so AF is hit or miss.

Couldn't agree more with the comment Brian made. If I recall right, the "old rule" is to keep shutter speed 1.5X times faster than the size of the lens. IS is suppose to help, but viewing peoples shots, I sometimes wonder if it's effective as suggested.

Doug, I know what Canon says, but assuming focusing should be carried out before the aperture stops down, the f/stop you're shooting with shouldn't matter as long as the lens/converter combination is f/5.6 or below. Or, I have missed something?

In fact, my old 100-300 f/5.6 L focuses the same using a Kenko Pro 1.4X as without (giving an f/stop of eight). However, using a Canon converter it doesn't. I'm not sure if it's because it's a slower focusing lens to begin with, but I've never had a problem using it.

Anyway... I've enjoyed following the thread. Thanks for doing the tests.

dharden
 
Posts: 104

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Wed May 14, 2008 6:58 pm


Hi Dang,

Hope you don't mind me jumping in before Doug - that's time zones for ya! :)

You're quite right about the "rule of thumb" with shutter speeds, but IS certainly helps! Of course if your subject moves then there's no substitute for a wide aperture lens to gain speed, but for more static subjects then I'm pretty impressed with what IS helps with. Technique is still important (and i still miss plenty!) but I wouldnt be without IS for the way I shoot (and I guess the way you work is part of the decision when buying such a lens......)

This shot was handheld at 1/60s and (you can tell from the whiskers) isn't showing any shake. Believe me it would have done without it! :). I think the leaf may be showing a little movement but it was being nibbled at the time! :)

Image

the Little Owl shot further up this thread was at 1/125s. The Chaco Owl (the middle pic) was 1/60s so it definitely helps! :D

you're also spot-on about the converter / lens effective max aperture in relation to focusing! As far as I know, whether or not the camera continues to AF depends on the information that the converter passes on to the body. If the body is sent anything more than f5.6 then the AF is turned off. If you have a converter that doesn't transmit, or you tape the transmission pins then the camera will still try to autofocus but might struggle, particularly in low light. I'm not sure exactly which bodies it applies to but it certainly does with the 20D and the 5D.....

dougj
 
Posts: 2276

Re: Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Post Thu May 15, 2008 1:13 am


Dave - great owl shots, the close up shows excellent fine detail. I would have liked to see the little one sitting on your head :)

The 1D bodies will AF at f/8 and wider while the rest require at least f/5.6 as I understand it, and I think Dave nailed it with the TC communicating the aperture setting. Canon disables AF when the f-stop is smaller than the spec for that body, and some TCs don't communicate the fact they are mounted.

I'm a believer in IS, but recognize it has limits. The early version is good for about a 2 stop improvement and I've read the current version works for up to 4 stops of improvement. If shutter speed is an issue, even with IS, I'll usually shoot a short burst of 3-4 frames, There may be some motion blur in 1-2, but they'll usually be a keeper that's pretty sharp.

Next

Board index Photography Technical Questions Lens comparisons @ 300mm & 400mm

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests