Has anyone swapped their Canon 300 F/2.8 IS for the 100-400II?

tarmac_chaser

tarmac_chaser

Messages
1,102
Name
Carl
Edit My Images
No
I'm the owner of a Mark 1 300 F/2.8IS that I usually use with my 1DIV.

I shoot for pleasure and normally outdoor sports, aviation and wildlife.

I love the 300 and have both a 1.4x and 2x teleconverter for it but I rarely use it with the 2x as the colours go a bit too dull for me.

I'm seriously tempted by the option to significantly lighten my kit bag by swapping to the equally highly regarded 100-400II.

Has anyone made this switch before? It seems using a 1.4x tc causes no issues, and the fact that I could take this lens on holiday more easily really appeals.

Interested to hear your thoughts!
 
The 100-400 is a damn good zoom but if you're going to be using it at 300-400mm then it's a backwards step from the 300/2.8 (420/4 with TC). I've got both and only pick up the zoom when <300mm is needed. I'd also be wary of sacrificing 2 potential stops at 300mm with a 1DMkIV.
 
Depends on the light you have available - I've not got a 300 f 2.8 but I do have a 400 f2.8 mkii and a 100-400 mkii - At this time of year I'll nearly always be using the 400 2.8 but given decent light I'm quite happy to use the 100-400 - it's every bit as sharp as my big prime - I was amazed by how good it was when I bought it last year. I bought it for photographing wildlife from the car and on walks when I don't want to carry the 400 but I've used it a lot for photographing sport and will do again when the light improves.
 
Canon Bob said:
The 100-400 is a damn good zoom but if you're going to be using it at 300-400mm then it's a backwards step from the 300/2.8 (420/4 with TC). I've got both and only pick up the zoom when <300mm is needed. I'd also be wary of sacrificing 2 potential stops at 300mm with a 1DMkIV.
Click to expand...

I have both too and I agree with all Bob has said here.
 
Bear in mind the 1DMkIV will only autofocus with the center AF point with a 1.4TC on the 100-400 IS MkII. Also @ F8 as your base you do need good light. That said, I've used mine a few times with the Tc and have been pretty happy with the results
 
I will answer this from a different angle. Between 300/2.8 and the zoom, the zoom would find space in my camera bag every time I go out shooting for myself. It's versatile, light and compact. 300mm would often stay home unless I am intentionally going to use it, and unlikely to be taken higher up the mountains. Of course at f/2.8 it is capable of things that the zoom is clearly not; this may or may not be important to you. For me I don't mind stopping down and shooting on tripod a lot of the time.

As you already have the 300mm, I would perhaps think about owning both when circumstances allow.

edit: maybe a higher res camera like 5DIV and it's successor will effectively allow cropping 300mm image to 400mm or even 500mm equiv while retaining more pixels and better IQ?
 
Last edited:
The 300 has gone off to Camera Jungle for them to value. If it's less than I can accept, I won't be selling it.

As much as I love the 300, the appeal of a lens I could take hiking really appeals most.

I have a 6D, 70-200II and a Sigma Art 50 F/1.4 as well so do have faster lenses for the nearer stuff
 
I had a 100-400ii but bought a used 300 2.8 IS for a trip to see if I wanted to switch - I made a deal with myself that I'd sell one of them when I got home.

A few months after getting back and the 300 was sold. It takes amazing photos and the background blur is more beautiful but the size, weight and pain from switching the extender on and off is too high a price to pay. The zoom is as sharp or sharper, focusses almost as fast and I love having the flexibility.

Now I'm itching to try a 200-400 or perhaps a 500 f4..... :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top