Hi all,
I was wondering if people could help me.
I was looking into new lenses and was wondering, which is sharper/better AF, out of the 300 f4 with a 1.4x Teleconvertor, or the 100-400 at 400mm?
Thanks
Harry
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
RE: 300 F4 + 1.4x Vs 100-400 @400
I presume you want the 300f4 rather than just going for the 400f5.6? (herein another debate)
Some users here say the 300+1.4 is sharper than the 100-400 @ 400, but the 400f5.6 will be sharper than the 300+1.4. The only downside is no IS. I expect that any differences may be obvious if you did large prints, but you'd otherwise need a magnifying glass to see any difference.
http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00ZbZv
Some users here say the 300+1.4 is sharper than the 100-400 @ 400, but the 400f5.6 will be sharper than the 300+1.4. The only downside is no IS. I expect that any differences may be obvious if you did large prints, but you'd otherwise need a magnifying glass to see any difference.
http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00ZbZv
RE: 300 F4 + 1.4x Vs 100-400 @400
Many thanks. I am really very interested in the 400 f/5.6 too, but I go to air bases a lot, and I think that being stuck at 400 all the time, may just be a little long, so the 300 with converter is more flexible?
What about the Autofocus?
Many thanks
Harry
What about the Autofocus?
Many thanks
Harry
RE: 300 F4 + 1.4x Vs 100-400 @400
I've no experience so I can only go on what I've read.
From what I read the AF is slowed by the IS, but with the shutter speeds you're likely to be using you're unlikely to use IS.
For your purposes the most flexible will be the 100-400 rather than taking the t/c on and off, but the AF on the 300 alone will be faster than on the 100-400. Now, how many fractions of a second difference probably isn't a readily available number.
You may have to hire them and try them out before committing to one or the other.
From what I read the AF is slowed by the IS, but with the shutter speeds you're likely to be using you're unlikely to use IS.
For your purposes the most flexible will be the 100-400 rather than taking the t/c on and off, but the AF on the 300 alone will be faster than on the 100-400. Now, how many fractions of a second difference probably isn't a readily available number.
You may have to hire them and try them out before committing to one or the other.
RE: 300 F4 + 1.4x Vs 100-400 @400
I did a very careful comparison of this before selling my 100-400. The 300 with the 1.4 was certainly as good, arguably a little sharper. And that was with a Mk.1 convertor. Presumably with a mk 2 or 3 convertor it will be better.
AF is slowed down by the convertor a bit, BUT the 300 on its own focuses better than the 100-400, so I'd say there's not much in it when you attach the convertor.
Cheers,
Colin
AF is slowed down by the convertor a bit, BUT the 300 on its own focuses better than the 100-400, so I'd say there's not much in it when you attach the convertor.
Cheers,
Colin
RE: 300 F4 + 1.4x Vs 100-400 @400
| Quoting ckw (Reply 4): Presumably with a mk 2 or 3 convertor it will be better. |
I have the 300 F4 IS and 1.4x Mk3. The 300 on its own is great - very sharp. I'm not sure I'll actually be using it with the 1.4 ever. Seems that sharpness takes too large a hit - might be able to use the 300 alone and crop, and still end up with a better photo.
But to be fair, I haven't played around with the combo a whole lot yet, and it could simply be that I haven't learned to shoot well with it.
RE: 300 F4 + 1.4x Vs 100-400 @400
Thanks, its a tricky one, as I need one lens that can cover between 300 and 400 with good sharpness, for less than £1000. So basically, 300 sometimes too short, 400 sometimes too long, and the 100-400 lacks quality!!
Harry
Harry
RE: 300 F4 + 1.4x Vs 100-400 @400
Compared to a prime, it does lack quality does it not?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests