cannon 300 mm v 300is

rijit

rijit

Messages
24
Edit My Images
No
I need to buy a 2.8 300 mm lens for shooting sports, at the mo can afford a s/h 300 non is
should i wait a while and get a new is,i cant make my mind up not so sure its worth the x what? 800 quid
anyone used or got both or any advice, cheers .
 
Have you used either of them? A 300/2.8 is a *heavy* lens and quite tiresome to hand-hold for a while. I would expect that the IS is of considerable benefit here. (Though I should stress that my only experience is of the IS version - and I *never* turn the IS off!)
 
I have the cheaper canon IS 300mm and it IS really makes the difference to me.
although at this range I don't use it to extend exposure, just purely camera shake
are you using it free standing or on a tripod?
 
As StuartR wouldn't dream of saying this, why don't you hire one for a couple of days and see what you think. You can turn the IS off and see what the failure rate is compared to IS on. Also evaluate how often you shoot at f2.8 rather than f4. That way you know just how much cash you are in for

John C
 
generally speaking you shouldn't need IS for sport, Although some on here will argue they do I suppose :)

I just bought the non IS and didnt even think of getting an IS.

You can't buy a new non IS 300mm 2.8 anymore can you?
 
I havnt checked but think youre right kipax, you cant buy a non is 300 new, but you can pick up a second hand non is for between 1000 and 1500, a year old is went for 1800 recently on ebay and a new one from hong kong havnt checked kelso yet , seems to be around £2300 give or take a little bit.
 
Some info on the 300 f2.8 non IS you may find intresting

Canon 300mm f2.8 L

Optically and mechanically there are no differences between the lenses and Canon only considers there to be one "full" model of the 300/2.8L non-IS.
However they did release three "sub-models" for lack of a better description. These were marked on the external box and also on the warranty card.
The original one had no numeral after its name, but the second and third ones were marked as II and III respectively.

Diffrences

MK I

The original lens has a metal hood and no strap slot opening on the back of the tripod foot.
The case for these lenses was a black vinyl-coated hard case.
This lens also has Canon's brown coating on the front element.

MK II

The MK II changed to a polycarbonate hood (lighter) and added the strap slot in the tripod foot.
These lenses came with a green aluminum-trimmed lens trunk rather than the hard case.
The front-element coating changed from the brown one to Canon's green coating during the MK II production run.

MK III

The III was very similar to the II but came with the newer beige trunk instead of the green one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top