So, I recently bought a new Canon R6 and am delighted with it. Only very slight downside is the reduced focal length having changed to full frame from cropped sensor, so considering a new 300mm f2.8 lens, but would like to know if anyone would have experience of using a x2 extender as i could use this along with my very sharp 70-200f2.8 lens? It would mean less gear to lug about, be much lighter, less expensive and also offer a longer focal length. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated....
New 300mm lens or extender
- Thread starter McNyat
- Start date
- Messages
- 2,171
- Name
- Steve, Coventry, England
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I tried quite a few on older Canons, and apart from genuine Canon , only found one out of the others that didn't noticeably affect quality, you will also lose 2 stops too.
I think it may be a poor choice compared to you other suggestion, the 300mm f2-8, and I wonder how much cheaper by the time you have factored in a good quality extender?
If you only other option was a lens costing thousands it would be a different choice.
Nod
Tootles
- Messages
- 45,617
- Name
- Nod (UK)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Even the best teleconverters will affect image quality, especially 2x. Depending on the final use (an a2 print really NEEDS as many MP as you can throw at it, an internet or other screen viewed image can get away with rather fewer!), cropping into an image from your current lens may well be a better option (and certainly cheaper!) The 2 stop loss can also make a big difference.
- Messages
- 2,905
- Name
- Tara
- Edit My Images
- No
A mix of youngsters
Got to start with a Robin Robin fledgling c by Tara Rerrie, on Flickr A House Sparrow young House Sparrow by Tara Rerrie, on Flickr A youngish Dunnock (this was the full frame at 600mm) Dunnock b by Tara Rerrie, on Flickr And here's the wet teeshirt shot...Good job it was warm. Soggy...
www.talkphotography.co.uk
The shots here were taken with the 300mm 2.8 l IS and the 2x extender miii. I love this combo both on my 7d mii and 1dx mi. It’s fast to focus and as sharp as you’ll ever need.
Having researched a little more, the web seems to say that the older non is version is just as good as the is(mk1) version. Given that i would be using it mainly for sports and possibly have the is turned off, are there any other reasons that would suggest i shoukd go for the is version? In summary, what makes it a better choice to justify the extra cost?
Can anyone offer some sound advice on this one please? Have a chance to get the nos IS version, but just wondering if i should wait and go for the stabised version instead. Is it worth the extra cash?
- Messages
- 6,951
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
One thing to perhaps consider is the availability of spares for the older lenses. I’d expect canon have dropped support of the non IS lenses due to their age. It’s one concern of older lenses.
What budget are you thinking of. If that’s known people could probably advise options for you.
Dale.
Bo Derek
- Messages
- 12,009
- Name
- Dale.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just putting this out there, but......................
Your suggested combo would be 600, f5.6. Have you considered the Sigma 150-600? C or S.
I have one, a C, and whilst it's no Canon big white, for what it is, it's blown me out of the water. It is as sharp as my 100-400L (Mk1)
Your suggested combo would be 600, f5.6. Have you considered the Sigma 150-600? C or S.
I have one, a C, and whilst it's no Canon big white, for what it is, it's blown me out of the water. It is as sharp as my 100-400L (Mk1)
- Messages
- 6,951
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
the sigma 150-600mm lenses aren’t playing nicely with canon R series mirrorless cameras.if I was the OP I’d stay away from them until thats fixed if I had a R series mirrorless camera like the OP does.
Dale.
Bo Derek
- Messages
- 12,009
- Name
- Dale.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 6,951
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You make a good point about it being 600mm f5.6 with the extender. That does make it a slower lens and open up other potential options. In any other circumstances the sigma would probably be best bang for buck.
Dale.
Bo Derek
- Messages
- 12,009
- Name
- Dale.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
With the OP saying an R6, I didn't consider the AF issues as I'm a bit fixated with the R7, having one on pre order.
It's a shame about the AF issues with RF bodies and Sigma lenses, but yes, it has to be considered. The 300, 2.8 extended, would be the better option at the moment.
I'll get my coat.
I didnt know that there were issues with the R6 and Sigma lenses? You mentioned about staying away until thats fixed... how would this happen... is it a firmware update? Im not to well versed in how that works? Also, its good advice about the older lenses and possible maintenance/parts problems... prob best to avoid that route. Thinking of maybe getting an R7 to put with a 300mm to get the longer reach and keeping he 70-200 on the R6. The crop sensor on the R7 with the 300 should be better?
Last edited:
- Messages
- 6,951
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It’s an interesting issue. I’m guessing it needs a lens firmware fix but the third parties likely need the details of the AF system to do so. I think the issue stems from having to reverse engineer the DSLR lens.
if you’re thinking of a 300mm f2.8 and a R7 then have you considered the 100-500 RF? I’ve been impressed so far with mine on the R6.
All 300mm f2.8 lenses can be quite old. The 300mm f2.8 non IS was released in 1987. it was replaced by the 300mm f2.8 IS I in 1999 with the 300mm f2.8 IS II then released in 2011. The II version is not in production any more.
- Messages
- 4,295
- Name
- Stu
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ciaran. some Q's......what do you shoot I haven't used an R6...how powerful is the R6 Af system compared to say a 1Div 1DXii
Mate I've used the Div and DXii and a 300F2.8 IS....I part ex'd the 300 for a 400DO IS ii.............I used both lenses with 1.4 and 2X ext iii's I shoot wildlife mainly fluffly things potentially slower moving,ha hares? than BIF
I sold 300 becuase of fears of getting it fixed.that alone .it's a stunniing lens.......the DO ii gave me a snag more reach.........which being me with my faved subjects,reach, is open to debate whether there was a NEED or simply lack of confidence
I also used the 300 with a 550D.
thoughts......don't buy extii's buy the iii........the 300 an 550D an 2X gave me some nice images but AF was painfully slow.......Af became much faster with a 1Div.......AF started to sing with the DXii......hence my 2nd Q....
This also leads me to why buy older tech Ef when as Rob says above you have the option of the RF 100-500
I suspect not know the reason the 1DXii and the 2Xext iii and the 400 DO isii sing together is because Canon designed that,designed them to work together. IIe when one of the links in that chain of 3 ain't there things ARE NOT the same
As an aside with advancements in tech in sensor tech and NR programes one can really push the bejees out of ISO so lack of light isn't such a big deal now as it was I don't really worry about ISO 16K with my combo what ya shoot might mean F 2.8 is needed for DOF not just sucking light in
So in conclusion although the 300 F 2.8 series are stonking stunningly sharp lenses oft mused as some of the sharpest canon ever made............ with an RF body I'd lean towards an RF lens
Caviat I know nowt other than the 3 bodies mentioned 2 extenders and 2 lenses all mentioned above so me opinion is seriously humble . maybe i'm not a gear freak? I'm a tool freak need tools to do a job if they do it I stop reading and looking ............an sure the 2X gives an IQ drop but again PP can dig into that
So so much here depends on me first Q whaddaya shoot?
all the luck
stu
Mate I've used the Div and DXii and a 300F2.8 IS....I part ex'd the 300 for a 400DO IS ii.............I used both lenses with 1.4 and 2X ext iii's I shoot wildlife mainly fluffly things potentially slower moving,ha hares? than BIF
I sold 300 becuase of fears of getting it fixed.that alone .it's a stunniing lens.......the DO ii gave me a snag more reach.........which being me with my faved subjects,reach, is open to debate whether there was a NEED or simply lack of confidence
I also used the 300 with a 550D.
thoughts......don't buy extii's buy the iii........the 300 an 550D an 2X gave me some nice images but AF was painfully slow.......Af became much faster with a 1Div.......AF started to sing with the DXii......hence my 2nd Q....
This also leads me to why buy older tech Ef when as Rob says above you have the option of the RF 100-500
I suspect not know the reason the 1DXii and the 2Xext iii and the 400 DO isii sing together is because Canon designed that,designed them to work together. IIe when one of the links in that chain of 3 ain't there things ARE NOT the same
As an aside with advancements in tech in sensor tech and NR programes one can really push the bejees out of ISO so lack of light isn't such a big deal now as it was I don't really worry about ISO 16K with my combo what ya shoot might mean F 2.8 is needed for DOF not just sucking light in
So in conclusion although the 300 F 2.8 series are stonking stunningly sharp lenses oft mused as some of the sharpest canon ever made............ with an RF body I'd lean towards an RF lens
Caviat I know nowt other than the 3 bodies mentioned 2 extenders and 2 lenses all mentioned above so me opinion is seriously humble . maybe i'm not a gear freak? I'm a tool freak need tools to do a job if they do it I stop reading and looking ............an sure the 2X gives an IQ drop but again PP can dig into that
So so much here depends on me first Q whaddaya shoot?
all the luck
stu
- Messages
- 51
- Name
- Jaco
- Edit My Images
- No
Me thinks, buy the FL you're most likely to use. Don't plan to buy a lens to use with a converter all the time.
Secondly, the EF 300/2.8 L IS lens (AF versions) is definitely one of the best lenses to 'take' a converter.. if there's no other option. And I presume same applies to the RF mount version...
Secondly, the EF 300/2.8 L IS lens (AF versions) is definitely one of the best lenses to 'take' a converter.. if there's no other option. And I presume same applies to the RF mount version...