[cspratt]

Is the 300 F/4L IS USM lens and a 1.4x converter combo any good? Is
this a good lens with or without the converter? You get a fixed 300mm
lens at F/4 and you can get 420mm with the 1.4x (f/5.6) or 600mm with
the 2x at F/8. Or should I just buy the 100-400 IS lens for birding? I
would like both but can only afford the one. Right noew I have the
28-135 IS USM lens which I find a wee bit soft but I've only had the
setup 2 weeks.

[LzyPhotographer]

I have the 100-400L IS and I love it.

You loose light and sharpness using a TC, so you might as well get the largest lens that you can afford.

[alibenn]

Hi,

I looked at all these lenses when I bought my 10D, and I ended up buying the 300mm f4 L (non IS version). Optically the non IS is superb, with the 1.4x, it still produces sharp images with little grain, however AF is lost with the 2x, which can be a pain. I believe the IS version is not quite as sharp as the non-IS version (marginal), but you have AF with the 2x.

I also looked at the 100-400, and decided against it, although I have seen plenty of great shots taken with one, and I could still be tempted in the future, although I am leaning more in the direction of a 500mm f4.

In the end, I rairly wish for less magnification, the lower the f-stop, the better really, depends where you are going to be shooting, in the forests of Malaysia the 300mm with a 1.4x gives the equivalent of 672mm at f5.6 .

I have a small gallery here:
:http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/...00/ppuser/7317

and more pics on: www.birdart.net

all were taken with the 300mm f4 on it's own or with either a 1.4 or 2x.

No matter what lens you end up with, the Canon L lenses are excellent.

Cheers,

Alister

[tarves57]

I got the 100-400mm not long ago and for some reason could not get many sharp photos with it. I exchanged it for the 300mm f4 IS + 1.4 extender and I have been totally amazed by the sharpness (with the extender and handheld!) in comparison to the 100-400. I haven't tried the 300 on its own yet.

I believe that the difference is that the 300mm is better in lower light, whilst it's possible that the 100-400mm is better in brighter sunshine. (Something I can't say for sure because whilst I had it, the sun never shone on my days off).

Just my experiences, although I have seen lots of fantastic photos from both lenses on various forums.

Susan

PS Both set ups cost about the same. It also took the shop 2 months to find me a 300mm lens to exchange for the 1-400mm, so I don't know how easy they are to find! In fact the lens they gave me is only to use until the order they put in to Canon is fulfilled (could be months apparently, but the lens they gave me, although used, was in excellent condition).

[LzyPhotographer]

You'll find there will be lots of people with great info as to why you should pick any one lens over another. Only you will be able to pick the one that really suits your eye and specifications.

Probably the best thing to do is go to a camera store and test the lenses. Maybe you can rent them for a week or so or just test them in the store. Keep an open mind and pick the brand and lens that you think takes the best pics.

Here's a link that maybe you'll find helpful too.

[jourdaj]

Alister,

I just looked at your images and find them beautiful! Well done!
I'm also looking at 300/f4 but may try for the 400/f5.6L and a Canon 10D.

I take it you are happy with your Canon 10D?

Regards,

Jerry
USA

Originally Posted by alibenn

Hi,

I looked at all these lenses when I bought my 10D, and I ended up buying the 300mm f4 L (non IS version). Optically the non IS is superb, with the 1.4x, it still produces sharp images with little grain, however AF is lost with the 2x, which can be a pain. I believe the IS version is not quite as sharp as the non-IS version (marginal), but you have AF with the 2x.

I also looked at the 100-400, and decided against it, although I have seen plenty of great shots taken with one, and I could still be tempted in the future, although I am leaning more in the direction of a 500mm f4.

In the end, I rairly wish for less magnification, the lower the f-stop, the better really, depends where you are going to be shooting, in the forests of Malaysia the 300mm with a 1.4x gives the equivalent of 672mm at f5.6 .

I have a small gallery here:
:http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/...00/ppuser/7317

and more pics on: www.birdart.net

all were taken with the 300mm f4 on it's own or with either a 1.4 or 2x.

No matter what lens you end up with, the Canon L lenses are excellent.

Cheers,

Alister

[LzyPhotographer]

Originally Posted by LzyPhotographer

You'll find there will be lots of people with great info as to why you should pick any one lens over another. Only you will be able to pick the one that really suits your eye and specifications.

Probably the best thing to do is go to a camera store and test the lenses. Maybe you can rent them for a week or so or just test them in the store. Keep an open mind and pick the brand and lens that you think takes the best pics.

Here's a link that maybe you'll find helpful too.

Geesh .. forgot the link.

http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm

[cspratt]

I just received my new Canon 300 F/4 IS USM lens and tried it out (handheld) on my backyard bird feeder, trees etc. When in autofocus mode there is a "clicking" sound before and after I press the 10D shutter. My 28-135 IS lens is very quiet in this regard. Is this "clicking" sound normal for this larger lens? Seems to be working fine but I haven't checked the images on my computer yet.

[dy1119]

Hi Chris,

This is the right noise. I have also the 28-135 which is so quite you're not sure it's working. With the 300/4 you know it's there.
BTW, you've made the right decision. Please see this link:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=8471214

Dror

[cspratt]

Followup: The generic isnrtuction sheet that came with the lens makes no mention f a small switch marked 1 and 2 just above the IS on off switch. What does this do?

I'm also posting a "first light" handheld image which has been cropped etc. I wasn't that happy with the focusing but I have to learn how to use this thing.

[LzyPhotographer]

1 is for regular IS (shaky hands, etc)
2 is for panning (cars, runners, flying birds)

[tarves57]

I usually have it on 2 permanently because let's face it, it's unusual to find a bird sitting still, they're usually hopping about so you are constantly "panning" right and left. That's the way I see it anyway. What do you use LzyP?

Another tip, when you are trying to focus on small birds hopping about in a tree in between the branches, it's a good idea to focus manually (i.e. the autofocus off), so that the camera doesn't focus on the bigger branches instead, losing contact with the bird.

Tip 2: If you aren't using a monopod or tripod then twist the tripod ring so that the "handle" is upwards. That way you have a nice handle to carry the camera/lens by. Saves your neck if you leave it dangling like I do, and probably saves strain on the camera/lens connection screw?

By the way, it takes fantastic photos of wildflowers/butterflies. All without having to change your lens. Just stand back a bit!

Have fun
Susan

[LzyPhotographer]

I read something a while back that talked about the sweet spots in the focusing squares.. each square has a section of it that focuses better. For the center square, it's the top left corner of the box.

In your pic, the green thing above the bird is more focused than the bird's face. That tells me that the box probably was centered over the birds face... hence, the top left corner of it grabbed the focus. Just a guess. But it is worth a try to take some pic and play with where you place the box for focusing and see if there's a difference.

Also, it never occurred to me to leave my IS set to 2. Duh! I'm going to try that.

[Jim Creek]

Originally Posted by cspratt

Is the 300 F/4L IS USM lens and a 1.4x converter combo any good?

Yes, this combo is quite good. There are many birders that prefer the 300/4 IS +1.4X over the EF 100-400 Zoom. Check out my gallery. All my photos were done with that combo. I have also used the 300/4 IS with the EF 2X TC with good results. I have a shot of a Mourning Dove with that combo in my Gallery as well. I also did a review of that lens right here on this site.

See my Gallery at: http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/...00/ppuser/8092

Here's an independent site that reviews the 300/4 IS with and without a 1.4X teleconverter.
http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/rev...00mm/index.htm

[cspratt]

Update:

I purchased the Canon 300L IS and starting to get used to it. I was disappointed with my first results, but now I'm getting much better images. I've posted some to my gallery. One of my latest is posted below.

The 1.4x extender is on order.

[cattypurry]

Jim, I did a lot of research before deciding on the 300/4 IS lens over the EF 100-400 Zoom. I bought a used one and I am waiting for it to come in. Your linked independent review was the one that allowed me to make a final decision. Thank you so much for the information.

Now I am looking to purchase a 1.4x Teleconverter.

Since I am of very modest means, I was hoping to purchase the Kenko Pro 300 1.4x TC. But in checking out reviews, I noticed that it was mentioned more than once that the IS does not work on the Sigma or Kenko TC's. I am not sure about the Tamron SP Pro TC. I can't confirm if the AF works with the IS on, or not. Have you used any TC other than the very expensive (and I am sure superior) Canon EF TC?

Anyone else have this lens with another 1.4x TC? Does the IS work with these other teleconverters, or not? Thanks in advance, for any help you can provide me. Patty

Originally Posted by Jim Creek

Yes, this combo is quite good. There are many birders that prefer the 300/4 IS +1.4X over the EF 100-400 Zoom. Check out my gallery. All my photos were done with that combo. I have also used the 300/4 IS with the EF 2X TC with good results. I have a shot of a Mourning Dove with that combo in my Gallery as well. I also did a review of that lens right here on this site.

See my Gallery at: http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/...00/ppuser/8092

Here's an independent site that reviews the 300/4 IS with and without a 1.4X teleconverter.
http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/rev...00mm/index.htm

[Jim Creek]

[quote=cattypurry] Have you used any TC other than the very expensive (and I am sure superior) Canon EF TC?

Sorry, but no, I have not used any other teleconverters other than the Canon EF 1.4X II and the EF 2X II.


Good luck!

[dy1119]

I have used the cheapest Tamron/Kenko 4 elements 2X with the 300 f/4L. The reason is that this teleconverter doesn't transfer any data to the camera, 300D in this case. The camera believes it's f/4, and if there is enough light (you can always increase the ISO) AF does work.
Please see the following example:

http://www.pbase.com/image/28717535

Dror

[vigibill]

I suggest anyone seriously interested in bird photography check out Arthur Morris' web site at http://www.birdsasart.com/. In my opinion he is the best bird photographer in the USA and is a Canon contract photographer. His book "Birds as Art" is an excellent photography instructional, albiet written prior to the digital explosion.

[cattypurry]

That is a great shot. I just purchased a Canon EX 1.4x TC MK I for under $200. I am waiting for its arrival. I wanted to make sure that I could use it with the IS and AF working. But your picture makes me want to get out the tripod and my old Tamron 2x TC and see what I can get. Thanks for sharing this photo. It's fabulous. Patty

Originally Posted by dy1119

I have used the cheapest Tamron/Kenko 4 elements 2X with the 300 f/4L. The reason is that this teleconverter doesn't transfer any data to the camera, 300D in this case. The camera believes it's f/4, and if there is enough light (you can always increase the ISO) AF does work.
Please see the following example:

http://www.pbase.com/image/28717535

Dror