Canon 300 f2.8 on a 40D. (1 Viewer)

so if i got the 500mm f4.5 sigma i would have to get the 1D camera to be able to use the 1.4x TC, does it also keep AF on all focus points & does it matter which 1D camera as there are various marks of It.

Thanks Roy.
sean.

canonman77 said:

so if i got the 500mm f4.5 sigma i would have to get the 1D camera to be able to use the 1.4x TC, does it also keep AF on all focus points & does it matter which 1D camera as there are various marks of It.

Thanks Roy.
sean.

Click to expand...

My Sigma 500mm f4.5 wouldn't af with a kenko or sigma 1.4x fitted to my 1d mkIII. By taping the pins I got the kenko but not the sigma to work, but being honest it slowed the af down a lot and made the bokeh pretty lousy
At f8 the only af point that works is the centre point.

Ive made up my mind, Its going to be the canon 300mm f2.8 IS & both TC's. Ive seen really good pics with a 2x & for walking around, will be perfect for me. Going any bigger, would certainly need a tripod & that Is a different type of photography altogether. I like to travel light (ish). All I need now Is to try one out somewhere...

Sean..

Hi Sean,

With reference to post no.11 in this thread I find that carrying a 300 lens with both TC's around in a backpack is no problem over long periods, bearing in mind I usually have a telescope and tripod on my shoulder at the same time.

The lens can be used handheld with either TC for short periods but as I said earlier it is best to use either a monopod or tripod for sharpest results, particularly in our dull conditions.

The Lesser Scaup and Kingfisher shots below were taken using stacked 1.4x+2x TC's; the Hobby with a 2x only. I used a tripod for all three shots.

canon 300mm f2.8 IS on a 40D

Hi Sandpiper, I think them 3 shots of yours are fantastic, I dont really know what peole are talking about when they say that Image quality Is rubbish with a 2x TC. Do you happen to have any shots where you have handheld with a 2x, just so I can compare. I can handhold fairly heavy lenses. The sigma 150-500 was quite heavy, I know the 300 Is heavier, but It dont take long to put your eye to the viewfinder & take a few shots does It, plus I will always have my monopod with me. I would really appreciate It If anyone could post a few pics handheld with a 2x Tc...

Sean.

From all the reviews I have seen the 300 f2.8 with a 2x is around the same IQ as the 400mm f5.6 with a 1.4tc and I am pleased with the results I am getting with the 400 and 1.4 (now I am using a quality tripod). I think to get consistent results with the 300 and 2x a tripod would help enormously.
Of course with the 300 and 2x you gain 40mm in length an more importantly 1 stop of light.

Hi Sean,

Glad you liked my pics. Amazingly enough I have only taken two shots handholding this lens with a 2x TC. The first one, albeit sharply focused on the bird, had too much foliage in the way. The second shot, attached below, was taken pointing high up in a tree at 500th/second at f4 at 400 ISO and converted from RAW to jpeg. If you can access the exif data you will notice that the TC is not recognised as it is the cheap Jessops model.

Mike.

Sean, I don't think you will get many offers of handheld pic's with a 2x. I've tried it and personally I think it's too long on a 1.6 body for any consistancy.

If I was only using mine with a 2x I would just take my tripod and Manfrotto 393.

Anyway, as you don't live far from me I will offer you the chance to try mine with or without converters/monopod/tripod.

I only live about 20 mins from JCB world headquarters, where you can have a ball with duck's and gulls. It's a great place if you want to take a load of shot's.

thats very kind Mick, but I dont drive. Is It near Wotton lodge estate?. Unfortunatley Ive never driven but thanks anyway Mick. I see that I would need a tripod all the time to use a 2x constantly with the lens. Because I dont drive, carrying a tripod Is a bit of a problem. Would a sturdy monopod do the trick? If yes then which one would be Ideal to carry the 300mm f2.8 with 2x TC..

Hi Sandpiper, Thats Is a good shot handheld, did you find It easy to get the shot & what camera body was you using...

Regards.
Sean.

It's in Rocester, derbyshire.

I use a Manfrotto 479. It's an aluminium monopod and it's a good height, or is it length. It is about 5-6 years old so I'm sure it's probabaly not made anymore.

Anyway I'm 6ft and it's perfect for me.

I use it with the Manfrotto 234 (non quick release)

This may sound daft but what birds are you likely to be photographing and where do you bird most of the time? I live in a location which is not particularly well known for large variety of species. I dont have a car either but I regularly take shots at just 300mm and less. Is it rarities you are after?

Sean,

I use a 20D and had no difficulty obtaining the shot except for waiting for the displaying bird to come into view. With care it is possible to handhold with a 2x attached, but after a minute or so my arms and shoulders begin to ache. Whenever possible I prefer to use a monopod. I have an old Jessops model which extends to my head height and has a tilting head, useful when you want to look up or down to photograph something.

a.dancy said:

This may sound daft but what birds are you likely to be photographing and where do you bird most of the time? I live in a location which is not particularly well known for large variety of species. I dont have a car either but I regularly take shots at just 300mm and less. Is it rarities you are after?

Click to expand...

I think there is a valid point here. If you shoot from hides, feeding stations or can get close to birds then you can take advantage of the 300mm f2.8's brilliant performance at 300mm. If, however, you are like me and shoot mainly on wide open estuaries where there is little or no cover then you will need the 600mm length just about all the time and to use a lens like this with a 2x tc glued on does not seem right to me.

Hi Sean.
There's some sound advice emerging here, Get a 2X by all means, it's a good addition to the 300 2.8, I've had one for several months but have only used it twice.
As GY Rob says it will be good to bring a close bird closer. To use it as standard practice may create more problems than it solves. The 1.4X is a different matter, you can use that baby on a regular basis.
Mike.

I go to my local fishing lakes where I can get fairly close, as I have got better at my field skills of stalking the birds & there are lots of different birds to photograph, there are 3 lakes with woodland In between so theres a lot of variation. No you mention It, I could probably get away with just the 1.4x, because Its always best to get as close to your subject, Isnt It, but to have the 2x for those times when Its needed. Roy I hear what your saying & totally agree 100%, but the 500/600mm primes are way out of my league, so I thought the 300 with 2x would be a superb compromise, used with a monopod.
Hi a.dancy, Its not rarities that I got out for specifically.. Because I have to walk most places I am trying to travel as light as possible you see, without having to lump a tripod everywhere.... This might sound daft, but what would you guys do, If you were you me?.. I would really, really appreciate your thoughts, because Im going mental here.

Regards.
Sean.

Think you've answered your own question Sean when you say you could get away with a 1.4x.

I think that's what most would do, in that they would start with a 1.4x and then get a 2x, if needed.

Though not impossible it is hard to be a good birder and a good photographer at the same time. It is a concentration thing as well as equipment thing. Though it also depends on what you want to get out of birding.

I think the Canon 300 f2.8 will serve you well provided you are determined to understand how to use the equipment to best advantage and do not fall into the trap of thinking the best pictures are all close-ups. 600mm is tripod territory though you can do a lot by resting your lens on a camera bag for those low angle shots.

We will have to hook for a day some time :t:

IMO you should really think about this.

A lot of people get it in their heads that a 300mm f2.8 w a 2x TC is the quickest and cheapest route to long reach and to have this lens with a 2x permanently attached is a complete waste of a crackin' piece of kit. Yes, the results it gives are pretty good but are no substitute fo a true long lens , like the 500mm f4. If the majority of shots you take now are heavy crops then it would probs be the better solution. Selling you're 100-400mm would get you pretty much towards the 500mm f4 with the money you save up and many birders get by very happily with just this lens. There's the 400mm f4 too which is a much more portable lens and might suit your needs as well, maybe even better.
Think long and hard if what you want is out and out reach or a variety of focal lengths for what situations dicate. Nikon users have the luxury of the 200mm-400mm f4 which can do pretty much every job you want from a wildlife lens, the 100-400mm aside the only comparable way of having a variety of focal lengths for Canon users with great IQ is the 300mm with TC'S I believe. I think this is what Adrian was elluding to, if you frequently find yourself in situations where you're after longer reach then perhaps this is not the solution for you.

I myself am eyeing up a 300mm f2.8 for the future because not so long ago I realised I could really do with the usage of a low-light lens and came close several times to buying a 70-200mm f2.8 to go with my 100-400mm. When Ian Goodalls lens came up in the classifieds I came to my senses and decided that what I needed was one lens to do all the jobs I want (better than carrying two weighty ones around), low-light performance when I need it and extra reach for the times I when it comes in useful. Missed out on buying it but I still know that's what I want. I'm fortunate in that the places I visit don't often require very long focal lengths so I could get by with a 1.4x or the naked 300mm. I'm not saying don't buy this lens if that's what you really want, by all means do, it's a highly regarded lens but I just hope you want it for the right reasons.

In reference to what Adrian said. There may be a gathering at Leighton Moss in the near future so if you are able to come then I'm sure you'll get some face to face advice, mostly from Adrian I hope as he actually knows what he's on about, I just make up stuff and hope it looks clever! :-O

Cheers. B

I would like to meet up with you guys. I am going for the 300 f2.8 & both TC's, but wont be sticking the 2x on It all the time. I think I have good field skills for creeping up on birds (the feathered variety). I will also keep the 100-400 on a 2nd body, perhaps another 40D. How will we sort out a meet up sometime?

Have a very happy christmas & thanks for all your help & advice In 2008..

Regards.
Sean..

My 300 f2.8 is almost glued to my 2X. Only occasionally when the light condition is too dim, then I might switch to the 1.4. I am not a strong man, but find handheld OK. Some support certainly help, but with a monopod, I find shooting at an elevated angle a bit clumpsy. Most of the time my 1.4 goes with my 300 f4.