• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

300 v 100-400 (1 Viewer)

graham catley

Well-known member
anyone in a position to compare image quality of the 300 2.8 II and 1.4x against the new 100-400 II at 400mm? The new lens is a pretty light compared to the 300 and considerably smaller for travelling and has the versatility of using anything from 100mm - 560mm with a 1.4 but the 300 2.8 of course has low light advantage but with better ISO performance that is maybe no so essential on a foreign trip when portability may be a more relevant factor -- the 100-400 is being claimed as very sharp throughout but is it as sharp as the 300? its a dilemma!
 
Lens

Hi I have the 300 2.8 and in my humble opinion its the best lens that Canon make I use it with a 2x convertor and the quality is stunning, my friend has the new 100-400 and that is a great lens very light and versatile it all comes down to money the 300 is twice the price if money is not an issue think what you want from the lens. Hope this helps:gh:
 
I own the Mk1 (IS) Canon 300 F2.8 and would echo Kath's comments. As a bare lens it is about as sharp as it gets and the Mk2 is a touch better, if that's possible!
Like you I am interested in the new 100-400 Mk2. I had the Mk1 and, although it was a very good lens, it simply does not hold up against the 300 F2.8 (any Canon version). The new 100-400 Mk2 seems to be a significant improvement and is lighter so it may prove a viable option. Personally my main concern is that you are loosing one or two stops of light with the 100-400 and this can be very important. If you are using one of Canon's current FF cameras (not 5DS and DSR) then their ISO performance will be a great help with the 100-400, personally I would not be happy with an F5.6 lens on current crop cameras.
Your needs may well be different but it is a point to consider.
 
I use the 300 2.8II with and without converters with the 5D3 and 1DX and appreciate how good it is but for foreign trips that are not solely birding / photography I thought the 100-400II being so much smaller and lighter might be a viable alternative to carrying the still fairly hefty 300 but opinions seem to vary on how good it is with the 1.4x attached and of course at f8 it's light restricted.
 
A very good thread to start graham i will look on this with interest as i own the 300 mark ii and use both extenders with it but on a recent trip to africa it was awesome for the bird side of things but for the bigger wildlife i was stuck with just head shots which became annoying i did look at the 70-200 but need to see more reviews on the 100-400 ii to make my decision hopefully someone might start posting some pics from the 100-400 ii on here ��
 
My 100-400 Mk II arrived yesterday. So far only time for BIF through the window but it is very much quicker than my much loved Mk I.

Will try to post some stuff later.

For me, the relative weights and costs were important factors along with the MFD. I used my MkI for dragonflies etc very successfully and hope for even greater things from the MkII.

I also now have the MkIII 1.4 tc and hope that this will prove effective.

Colin
 
I'm impressed and love the versatility... Here's a few pics.

All the best

Pete
 

Attachments

  • 18 UO3.jpg
    18 UO3.jpg
    345.6 KB · Views: 188
  • 09 Sika 1.jpg
    09 Sika 1.jpg
    598.1 KB · Views: 160
  • 20 WTE1.jpg
    20 WTE1.jpg
    536.3 KB · Views: 209
  • 06 WTE5.jpg
    06 WTE5.jpg
    385.2 KB · Views: 183
  • 16 RCC3.jpg
    16 RCC3.jpg
    546.9 KB · Views: 191
And a few more for good measure...
 

Attachments

  • 02 BTG.jpg
    02 BTG.jpg
    356.5 KB · Views: 158
  • 10 WS12.jpg
    10 WS12.jpg
    449.6 KB · Views: 140
  • 11 Mallard 1.jpg
    11 Mallard 1.jpg
    497.2 KB · Views: 120
  • 10 WS10.jpg
    10 WS10.jpg
    961.2 KB · Views: 125
  • 17 RCC1.jpg
    17 RCC1.jpg
    368.7 KB · Views: 145
Close focus is amazing too... take this virtually uncropped icicle for example, taken at <1m!
 

Attachments

  • 02 Icicle.jpg
    02 Icicle.jpg
    65.1 KB · Views: 201
Seriously nice images from a nice location Pete! All with the 7D2 as well? Are these all just with the bare lens or any with a converter ?
 
I have the 100-400 mk 2 and 7d2 now Graham. I have owned the 300mk2, only recently selling it so not able to make a side by side comparison. I believe however that my current set up is the best set up I have owned in terms of image quality and versatility (In reasonable light.) I'm only across the water in Hull if you fancy a meet up you can try my lens out.
 
The 7Dmk2 + 100-400 Mk2 seems to be a great combination. Location not as nice as Pete's but this Black Brant was photographed on a very dull afternoon by a caravan park in coastal Hampshire, with the 1.4 TC Mk3. I've had to brighten it up a bit but could never have got this with the old versions. I can't compare with the rather more expensive 300.

cheers, alan
 

Attachments

  • 1-bb-bf (2).JPG
    1-bb-bf (2).JPG
    288.9 KB · Views: 185
I have the 100-400 mk 2 and 7d2 now Graham. I have owned the 300mk2, only recently selling it so not able to make a side by side comparison. I believe however that my current set up is the best set up I have owned in terms of image quality and versatility (In reasonable light.) I'm only across the water in Hull if you fancy a meet up you can try my lens out.
Sounds good: some bread and gulls a target? Can you send me a pm or contact details?
Graham
 
I use the 300 2.8II with and without converters with the 5D3 and 1DX and appreciate how good it is but for foreign trips that are not solely birding / photography I thought the 100-400II being so much smaller and lighter might be a viable alternative to carrying the still fairly hefty 300 but opinions seem to vary on how good it is with the 1.4x attached and of course at f8 it's light restricted.

Didn't realise that you had a 1DX + 5D3 - the F5.6 aperture shouldn't be a problem then!
As you state the new 100-400 is a FAR better option for travel, especially if it is not primarily a photography trip. It + a 24-105, or similar, would cover nearly everything. It was kind of one poster to offer you a try out of his lens, I wish there were more people like this, most are so precious about their gear.
Please let us know how you get on, I for one, would be interested in your observations.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top