Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average.
Old Monday 16th February 2015, 12:10   #1
graham catley
Registered User
 
graham catley's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Barton-on-Humber
Posts: 648
300 v 100-400

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!
graham catley is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 16th February 2015, 15:05   #2
katholdbird
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Nuneaton
Posts: 42
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
katholdbird is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th February 2015, 19:48   #3
johnf3f
johnf3f

 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: South Wales UK
Posts: 1,009
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.
johnf3f is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 18th February 2015, 23:35   #4
graham catley
Registered User
 
graham catley's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Barton-on-Humber
Posts: 648
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.
graham catley is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 19th February 2015, 19:21   #5
Davecr24
Registered User
 
Davecr24's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: cirencester
Posts: 191
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 ��
Davecr24 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 2013 2014 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 20th February 2015, 09:02   #6
colincurry
Registered User
 
colincurry's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 259
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
colincurry is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 20th February 2015, 12:58   #7
petemorris
Registered User
 
petemorris's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Clitheroe, Lancashire
Posts: 833
I'm impressed and love the versatility... Here's a few pics.

All the best

Pete
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	18 UO3.jpg
Views:	167
Size:	345.6 KB
ID:	533135  Click image for larger version

Name:	09 Sika 1.jpg
Views:	144
Size:	598.1 KB
ID:	533136  Click image for larger version

Name:	20 WTE1.jpg
Views:	191
Size:	536.3 KB
ID:	533137  Click image for larger version

Name:	06 WTE5.jpg
Views:	162
Size:	385.2 KB
ID:	533138  Click image for larger version

Name:	16 RCC3.jpg
Views:	169
Size:	546.9 KB
ID:	533139  

petemorris is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 20th February 2015, 13:01   #8
petemorris
Registered User
 
petemorris's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Clitheroe, Lancashire
Posts: 833
And a few more for good measure...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	02 BTG.jpg
Views:	134
Size:	356.5 KB
ID:	533140  Click image for larger version

Name:	10 WS12.jpg
Views:	121
Size:	449.6 KB
ID:	533141  Click image for larger version

Name:	11 Mallard 1.jpg
Views:	100
Size:	497.2 KB
ID:	533142  Click image for larger version

Name:	10 WS10.jpg
Views:	107
Size:	961.2 KB
ID:	533143  Click image for larger version

Name:	17 RCC1.jpg
Views:	130
Size:	368.7 KB
ID:	533144  

petemorris is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 20th February 2015, 13:10   #9
petemorris
Registered User
 
petemorris's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Clitheroe, Lancashire
Posts: 833
Close focus is amazing too... take this virtually uncropped icicle for example, taken at <1m!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	02 Icicle.jpg
Views:	182
Size:	65.1 KB
ID:	533146  
petemorris is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 20th February 2015, 19:50   #10
graham catley
Registered User
 
graham catley's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Barton-on-Humber
Posts: 648
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 ?
graham catley is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 21st February 2015, 15:19   #11
petemorris
Registered User
 
petemorris's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Clitheroe, Lancashire
Posts: 833
Cheers Graham... yep, all 7d2, no converter. 1.4x does work ok, and iq not bad. Need to test that more...

Cheers

Pete
petemorris is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 21st February 2015, 20:07   #12
holzphoto
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: louisville, ky
Posts: 116
i have 100-400 ii and 300 2.8 IS II. if the weather clears up, maybe i'll go to the zoo.
holzphoto is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 24th February 2015, 21:53   #13
v_cowell
Registered User
 
v_cowell's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hull, East Yorkshire
Posts: 409
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.
v_cowell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 24th February 2015, 22:11   #14
lewis20126
Registered User
 
lewis20126's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 8,948
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
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	1-bb-bf (2).JPG
Views:	161
Size:	288.9 KB
ID:	533743  
lewis20126 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th February 2015, 22:03   #15
graham catley
Registered User
 
graham catley's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Barton-on-Humber
Posts: 648
Quote:
Originally Posted by v_cowell View Post
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
graham catley is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 26th February 2015, 19:53   #16
colincurry
Registered User
 
colincurry's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 259
I have posted some snaps using the 7D Mk2 and 100-400 Mk2 under the Canon 7D main thread.

Colin
colincurry is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 26th February 2015, 20:40   #17
johnf3f
johnf3f

 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: South Wales UK
Posts: 1,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by graham catley View Post
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.
johnf3f is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.18094397 seconds with 27 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:20.