• 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.

Canon 100-400 isii versus Canon 300 f2.8 isii (1 Viewer)

mikenott

mikenott

Flawed but improving!
England
I know that the biggest difference is price, but do any Forum members have both of these and can give me some feedback on their comparative quality and ease of use? Old age and bad shoulder forcing rethink of how much to cart around and thinking of changing 300 for 100-400 as a first step - especially as 100-400 price has dropped recently. Will be used mostly for reservoir, BIF and static shots probably with a 1.4 III and 1Dx.

Grateful for any opinions.

Michael.
 
I ahve teh new 100-400 and like it alot, I have seen some very good images with a teleconvertor - sorry I cannot compare with teh 300. Have you tried borrowing or renting either / both to see which suits you best? I am guessing from your description that you will want / need all the reach you can get so the 400 would be the best option. Haveyou thought about the 400DO?

Good luck
 
Hi Mike,
I am assuming you still have the 300Mkll, as I had until 18 months ago, so you will know that it is a superb lens which will take both 1.4x and 2x Mklll 's but weighs up to 2700gms with converters. I had no hesitation in getting the 100-400Mkll when it became available and haven't regretted it. Even though heavier than the original Mkl version it is an excellent walk-about lens especially for BIF and butterflies/ dragonflies. I use it with my 5D3 and sometimes a converter, so it should be great with the 1DX. It saves you 800gms over the 300mkll which is not inconsiderable when on a Black rapid strap.
However, I prefer to marry it with my 7D2 which gives me a little more reach without using the converter. There is always some loss of AF speed and IQ with the 1.4x attached.
My advice would be to replace the 300 with the 100-400 and 7D2, which might still be within your budget, and you will have most options covered.

Good luck.
Ian
 
goodallian said:
Hi Mike,
I am assuming you still have the 300Mkll, as I had until 18 months ago, so you will know that it is a superb lens which will take both 1.4x and 2x Mklll 's but weighs up to 2700gms with converters. I had no hesitation in getting the 100-400Mkll when it became available and haven't regretted it. Even though heavier than the original Mkl version it is an excellent walk-about lens especially for BIF and butterflies/ dragonflies. I use it with my 5D3 and sometimes a converter, so it should be great with the 1DX. It saves you 800gms over the 300mkll which is not inconsiderable when on a Black rapid strap.
However, I prefer to marry it with my 7D2 which gives me a little more reach without using the converter. There is always some loss of AF speed and IQ with the 1.4x attached.
My advice would be to replace the 300 with the 100-400 and 7D2, which might still be within your budget, and you will have most options covered.

Good luck.
Ian
Click to expand...

I can echo these comments. I have the new 100-400, 1.4x and 7D2 and am very pleased with results, to date. Have previously owned the 300f2.8 which was superb but given the weight difference I am happier with the new set up. I have a friend using the 100-400 with 1DX and getting good results. Doubt very much you would regret getting 100-400. Years ago I had the old 100-400 and there is absolutely no comparison between them, chalk and cheese. I do accept there were good and bad copies of the old one.

Phil
 
If your budget allows, the 400 DO mkII lens is absolutely superb, as sharp as the 300 2.8 mkII but much lighter weight (especially without the 1.4 extender). As good as the zoom is, I don't think the sharpness can compare with either of these two prime lenses once there is a bit of distance with the subject.

Wilko - if you are considering between the old and new zoom, don't. The old one is poor in comparison to the new zoom, in my opinion. Sharpness, AF and IS, all far superior. I can't over emphasis enough the step up the new Canon lens's are, though especially the 400 DO (which is considerably cheaper abroad).

James
 
James Eaton said:
Wilko - if you are considering between the old and new zoom, don't. The old one is poor in comparison to the new zoom, in my opinion. Sharpness, AF and IS, all far superior. I can't over emphasis enough the step up the new Canon lens's are, though especially the 400 DO (which is considerably cheaper abroad).

James
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot James,.. the issue is the costs here. The new one costs me almost twice the amount of money and for me that's quite an investment. Another argument to not-buy the old one is the push-pull zoom mechanism. I might not get used to that.
 
I was having the same debate. The old 'pump' action would be a wrong step but the price difference for the new one is big! I cannot afford the new zoom, definately not the old so I have started looking at alternatives (Sigma, Tamron etc.).
The logic is if I want prfoessional quality I have to buy a prime, which could be the step after this, so I want something that fills the gap in which case I don't want to spend 2000€!
 
I have used both the new and old 100-400 and I don't get why people have a problem with the push-pull zoom. I had no problems using it, quick and easy zoom along the whole range and no problems with dust sucking. In fact I had to have the new 100-400 serviced (for free) after only 3 months due to it collecting excessive dust! Looks better now.
The new one is sharper, but not that much (I had a great copy of the old one). What I do love about the new one is the much closer focus, great for large insects. Extremely versatile lens, you won't regret buying it.
 
I replaced my old 100-400mm a few months ago. Consider the mk2 sharper and IS far superior to the mk1 plus its close focus will be great once insects are out. In fact the Canon macro 100mm close focus is .3m whilst this lens at 400mm will focus down to .98m!! I still have the problem that in the heat of the moment, I find I am still trying to pull the lens out instead of turning for more mag.
I also have a 300mm mk2, which is just about the sharpest and fastest lens I have used. For birds in flight it leaves others standing, the obvious disadvantage being lack of length. However the 1.4X converter does not seem to make much difference, whilst a 2X still gives good results.
Have not tried a direct comparison yet, but with good light and a close subject the 100-400 holds up well. The 300mm obviously better for BIF or in poor light.
Would suggest that if you are using a 1DX the 300 mk2 would be the best bet at 300, 420 or 600mm on a res.
I brought the zoom for use when on long dog walks, getting too old to lug the 300mm round for too long.

www.kellingnature.zenfolio.com
 
Last edited:
As long as you have the spare cash I think it really comes down to that extra stop you get with the 300f 2.8

Rob.
 
Thanks for all the input and thoughts. I should have explained that I have a 600isII, a 300f2.8isii with a 1Dx and a 5DSR. A pending cruise holiday (luggage limitations) and advancing years (weight of kit) made me start to rethink my kit. The 600 I love, even though it is big and heavy although I think in a few years I will end up with the equivalent of a 1Dx and a 100-400isii. But having read your feedback and some field experience with a loan 100-400isii (thanks Charlie!), I have concluded that there is no significant advantage in moving to the 100-400. Ignoring quality for a second, I found that the 100-400 when extended felt as heavy in the hand as the 300isii. OK, it feels lighter when the zoom is wound back, but the benefit of that weights saving (in my mind) doesn't outweigh the IQ and extra couple of stops I will get from the 300II. I also found that I was using the 100-400 at 400 most of the time, and low light becomes more of an issue in the UK's low winter light conditions.

So the 300 is a keeper for now. But thank you all for your thoughts, Just need to sell the 5DSR to put funds towards a 1DXii now!

Michael.
 
Last edited:
mikenott said:
Thanks for all the input and thoughts. I should have explained that I have a 600isII, a 300f2.8isii with a 1Dx and a 5DSR. A pending cruise holiday (luggage limitations) and advancing years (weight of kit) made me start to rethink my kit. The 600 I love, even though it is big and heavy although I think in a few years I will end up with the equivalent of a 1Dx and a 100-400isii. But having read your feedback and some field experience with a loan 100-400isii (thanks Charlie!), I have concluded that there is no significant advantage in moving to the 100-400. Ignoring quality for a second, I found that the 100-400 when extended felt as heavy in the hand as the 300isii. OK, it feels lighter when the zoom is wound back, but the benefit of that weights saving (in my mind) doesn't outweigh the IQ and extra couple of stops I will get from the 300II. I also found that I was using the 100-400 at 400 most of the time, and low light becomes more of an issue in the UK's low winter light conditions.

So the 300 is a keeper for now. But thank you all for your thoughts, Just need to sell the 5DSR to put funds towards a 1DXii now!

Michael.
Click to expand...

Why not wait a bit and see what the 5Dmk4 is like.

John
 
Warning! This thread is more than 8 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.

Similar threads

A
Using Canon R6 in full frame versus cropped mode?
Replies
3
Views
5K
Aliks
A
P
Which Canon body for a 100-400 mkII?
Replies
9
Views
4K
S.Davis
S
Geoff Pain
100-400 mk11
Replies
4
Views
2K
thanks4thefish42
T
ammadoux
Zuiko 100-400 mm
Replies
10
Views
3K
WildPhotographer
WildPhotographer
canonman77
Which setup to take??
Replies
2
Views
555
canonman77
canonman77

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top