Am I being crazy purchasing a 300mm F2.8 lens + 2x tc? (1 Viewer)

CCRII · Nov 10, 2007

I am about to send away for one of these but I am hesitating just a little. I know this is not the best for IQ but it would be faster AF, better IQ, more reach then my 1-4zoom and I can still handhold. I know that the 400mm DO might be a better choice, but it is $1500 more then the 300f2.8 with 2x tc and I have heard mostly bad reports on it from professionals.

I know this is not the best upgrade but it is what I can afford now and my thinking is since canon lenses retain their value so well this will get me by until I can afford a 500mm f4 or better. I will be able to keep the tc for these larger lenses later on down the road.

I only ever use the 400mm setting on the zoom and the 300 f2.8 + 2x tc would get me to a 600mm f5.6! Which would be just terrific because I have a real problem with getting close enough to 50% of the birds around here despite trying various tactics to get closer. I mean if I was at 12x power that would be pretty amazing and a big difference from 8x.

Keith Reeder · Nov 10, 2007

Budget for a 1.4x as well, then you've got a great 300/420/600mm combo.

Andy Bright · Nov 10, 2007

Great lens, very adaptable... you'll not regret it. As Keith says, get a 1.4x tc as well.
Although 300+2x is o.k wide open, I stop down a touch and increase iso if need be.
cheers,
Andy

CCRII · Nov 10, 2007

Keith Reeder said:
Budget for a 1.4x as well, then you've got a great 300/420/600mm combo.

Well it is pushing it but maybe later on anyway. But that is a great point because it makes the lens more versatile. I like it! I like the way you think! 300 for flight shots, 420 for sharper images of birds I can get close to and 600 for the more out of reach birds. I love it! I just hope I can really get used to the extra 2.5 or so pounds. But then again it has the newer version IS so that should help no?

Harold Stiver · Nov 10, 2007

I have never shot with this combination but Chas Glatzer, one of the world's finest nature photographers has said that this is amazingly sharp, better than some of Canon's large primes, which is heady company.

Keith Reeder · Nov 10, 2007

An cheaper alternative to a 1.4x and a 2x is two 1.4x TCs: I've read a few reports suggesting that the IQ of two stacked 1.4s is pretty much the same as a 2x.

Admittedly, you get slightly less reach that way - 588mm rather than 600mm.

CCRII · Nov 10, 2007

Keith Reeder said:
An cheaper alternative to a 1.4x and a 2x is two 1.4x TCs: I've read a few reports suggesting that the IQ of two stacked 1.4s is pretty much the same as a 2x.

Admittedly, you get slightly less reach that way - 588mm rather than 600mm.

Good thought! May have to go that route.

Thanks for all the input guys!

gkrpepper · Nov 10, 2007

Over here in the states you usually get the Canon 1.4 and 2.0 extenders for the same price (www.17photo.com) $279.95. That's where I got my 1.4 that I am using for my Canon 300mm f4.

deshojo · Nov 10, 2007

The image quality of the 300mm f2.8 is amazing, probably the best in Canon's whole line-up; it copes with the 2x extender better than the 600mm f4.
As Andy says, just stop down slightly to regain the sharpness and contrast (though it is still sharper wide open with the 2x than many lenses without).

The versatility it provides is very useful, giving you 420mm and 600mm options, as well as great low light ability at f2.8.
You'll be astounded when you see the quality of the pics!

Roy C · Nov 11, 2007

Keith Reeder said:
An cheaper alternative to a 1.4x and a 2x is two 1.4x TCs: I've read a few reports suggesting that the IQ of two stacked 1.4s is pretty much the same as a 2x.

Admittedly, you get slightly less reach that way - 588mm rather than 600mm.

I have done some test with stacked 1.4's v 2x (not with this lens though) and agree that there is not a lot of difference in IQ. Having said that most Canon 2x converters seem to be the same price as the 1.4 x so I do not think it would be any cheaper.
With a lens as good as the 300 2.8 stacking a 1.4 and 2x has possibilities

Sandpiper · Nov 11, 2007

I use a Canon 300 2.8 with stacked 1.4x and 2x converters, neither of which are made by Canon, with good results. Attached below two shots taken with this combination:

eastwood · Nov 11, 2007

I got the whole combination, but almost with the 2X glued to the lens. I am very satisfied with the IQ, whether on my XTi or 40D.

herb barnes · Nov 12, 2007

Hi,

Yeah, I think you are making a mistake. The 300mm would be ok (400 would be better), but the 2x extender limits your effective apperature to around f/11. That prohibits handholding. My Canon 400mm is extremely sharp and (in bright sun) can stand shutter speeds upto 1/1600 sec at f 5/6 to freeze hand held flight shots. Check my gallery to see what I have done with this lens. My problem is not with your lens, its with the 2x extender. I have the scope, the 2x extender and have never used them since I got the 400mm. (Don't forget that with the .6 factor. In case you don't know, the image sensor on a digital camera is .6 smaller than the area of a 35mm frame. That being the case, a telephoto lens designed for a FILM camera provides a .6 increase in effective focal length when used on a digital camera. In reality, my 400mm film lens produces an effective focal length of 640mm on my Canon Digital Rebel XTI camera. Whereas, a lens designed for a digital camera does not offer this advantage! Be sure which lens you are buying!!! Hope this helps. Herb Barnes

Roy C · Nov 12, 2007

herb barnes said:
Hi,

Yeah, I think you are making a mistake. The 300mm would be ok (400 would be better), but the 2x extender limits your effective apperature to around

The original poster is talking about the 300mm f2.8 lens which means that with a 2x tc fitted it is a 600mm f5.6. this lens takes the converters very well and is considered to be one of Canons sharpest lenses. I have the 400mm f5.6 but the 300mm f2.8 lens would be much better with a 2x tc and it will also retain AF on all Canon cameras. I think you are probably confusing this lens with something else (have you seen the price of the 300mm f2.8 ?)

mjmw · Nov 12, 2007

herb barnes said:
Hi, Yeah, I think you are making a mistake. The 300mm would be ok (400 would be better), but the 2x extender limits your effective apperature to around f/11. That prohibits handholding.

I think that CCRII is looking at the 300mm f2.8 rather than whatever lens you are thinking of.

herb barnes said:
My Canon 400mm is extremely sharp and (in bright sun) can stand shutter speeds upto 1/1600 sec at f 5/6 to freeze hand held flight shots.

Erm...I have taken shots at 1/8000, f5.6 with my 400/5.6...not sure what you are trying to say?

herb barnes said:
My problem is not with your lens, its with the 2x extender. I have the scope, the 2x extender and have never used them since I got the 400mm. (Don't forget that with the .6 factor. In case you don't know, the image sensor on a digital camera is .6 smaller than the area of a 35mm frame. That being the case, a telephoto lens designed for a FILM camera provides a .6 increase in effective focal length when used on a digital camera. In reality, my 400mm film lens produces an effective focal length of 640mm on my Canon Digital Rebel XTI camera. Whereas, a lens designed for a digital camera does not offer this advantage! Be sure which lens you are buying!!! Hope this helps. Herb Barnes

Not sure what lenses you are refering to here Herb - the focal length is the focal length, regardless of the camera it is designed for...

Am I being crazy purchasing a 300mm F2.8 lens + 2x tc? (1 Viewer)

More options

CCRII

Well-known member

Keith Reeder

Watch the birdie...

Andy Bright

Administrator

CCRII

Well-known member

Harold Stiver

Well-known member

Keith Reeder

Watch the birdie...

CCRII

Well-known member

gkrpepper

Well-known member

deshojo

Well-known member

Roy C

Occasional bird snapper

Sandpiper

Mike Powell

Attachments

eastwood

Well-known member

herb barnes

Well-known member

Roy C

Occasional bird snapper

mjmw

formally known as mw_aurora

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread