canon 300mm f2.8 non is (1 Viewer)

I want to ask how is Canon 300/2.8 non is compared to 300/2.8 mk1 and mk2? What is the difference in resolution and contrast, which is sharper with teleconverters? Is non-is version best buy? Thanks!

I've had 300 F/2.8L Canon AF lenses for several years, and have found that using a 1.4x extender is normally OK; using a 2x extender needs more care. Specifically, I've found that AF-MA needs careful optimisation, and that can take time. When optimised, I've had good results from both the non-IS, and the later IS versions.

The non-IS version of the EF 300 F/2.8 L was the first AF version, and it's what I bought as my first "big white" - as a well used copy, after using an EF 300 F4L (non-IS) for several years. I later bought the EF 300 F/2.8L IS.
Physically, the original lens is heavier and has some nice touches, omitted from the later IS version, such as the rotating strap mounts. It takes the older slot-in filter size, 49mm vs 52. Mine came with Canon's thickly padded case, but the padding wasn't sufficient to stop it being damaged by trolleying over rough ground - hence my need for a repair, and that proved difficult. A resourceful repairer was necessary as parts are no longer obtainable from Canon. (Lehmanns of Stoke-on-Trent, in the UK, sorted mine for me after another Canon approved repairer made matters worse.)

Funnily enough there was one of listed on a well known auction site the other week,and after reading about repair problems, I contacted Lehmanns to be told it's impossible to source parts for them now.

Cheers.

Steve.

Is it possible for autofocus of the non is version to be repaired, if there are problems. Also is it true that non is is sharper than is1 or is2 versions? Thanks!

Hi,
This review may help you to decide - Ken Rockwell uses the original 300 f2.8L and really rates it very highly.
As said before, the only issue is if the lens breaks down as repair it appears, would be difficult.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/300mm-f28.htm

bockos said:

Is it possible for autofocus of the non is version to be repaired, if there are problems. Also is it true that non is is sharper than is1 or is2 versions? Thanks!

Click to expand...

Only if you have the parts,because canon doesn't not make the parts anymore.The lens will not manual focus either if the autofocus is faulty.

Cheers.

Steve.B

Is it true that when the autofocus motor is broken, the manual focus is also not available, because I read somewhere that the manual focus is connected with the autofocus in this non is version? So if the autofocus of the non is is broken, I can't use the manual focus and the lens is totally unuseful? Is this valid for the is version?

I found the statement that claims that there is no MF:
The early non-IS super telephotos - 200/1.8L. 300/2.8L, 400/2.8L and 500/4.5L (don't know about the 600/4L though) all use the same AF motor. Without power to the motor there is no MF either as this is not mechanical but a fly-by-wire system, so you cannot convert to a purely MF lens without the AF working............... Canon changed this on the IS versions of these lenses. Because of the age of these lenses Canon have stopped servicing them and hold no spares.
It is very frustrating that there is no MF if AF is broken.

In other words: Forget about those old Canon lenses. If you want to use old MF lenses, you'd be far better off getting some Nikon gear. A D7200 for instance will work with MF lenses going back well over 30 years. And the old MF lenses are far easier to focus than most modern AF lenses.

Hermann