| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
|
  | sent on 24 Gennaio 2016 Pros: sharpness, good for almost everything Cons: just to short for birds Opinion: A very good telephoto lens with an average circulation of high F2.8 brightness . Those with extenders and crop factoor body 's above average telephoto reach fetches a good image quality . Suitable for virtually all work areas when it comes to capturing details. Consider sport, portrait, landscape and wildlife . Also easy to handle despite its weight with a shoulder strap you can walk the whole day .the sharpest lens I ever had.. With 1.4 converter still sharp , with just under 2.0 but still usable . |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
  | sent on 19 Dicembre 2024 Pros: Image quality, brightness, Cons: Weight Opinion: Optical always and in any case highly performing. I've been using it for a lifetime and would never change it for a stabilized model. The weight is overcome with the use of a monopod. Coupled with the 1.4x it becomes a 420/4, maintaining the quality and speed of focusing. My use is purely in sports photography and, if I don't use a monopod, I carry it on my shoulder with the inseparable BlackRapid R1. To counterbalance it another body with the 70-200/2.8. He too is not IS. |
  | sent on 19 Dicembre 2024 Pros: image quality, f2.8 aperture, focus preset, manual focus with multiple options for Cons: No stabilization, old-fashioned autofocus, lack of service support and spare parts Opinion: The EF 300mm f/2.8L usm was the first L-series supertelephoto lens with an EF mount, released in 1987. For the time it was an excellent lens, in terms of image quality and autofocus performance, which for the time was something still in its infancy (the first EOS 1, from 1989, had only one focus point). Today, of course, it gets better: the only reason to prefer the EF 300mm f2.8L usm to the IS and IS II versions is the lower price. That said, the optics still have merits. The image quality, for example, is still more than satisfactory with digital cameras, even at the maximum aperture of the diaphragm: clearly the microcontrast levels do not reach those of the IS and IS II versions, but at the time there were also different standards, with film SLRs. The f2.8 aperture, together with the 300mm focal length, is the main attraction. With the addition of extenders, especially the 2x, there is a fairly noticeable drop, but the result is still acceptable, and you have a 600mm f5.6 equivalent on your hands. As for the autofocus, it is a system from 37 years ago: the focusing speed is not very high (a 100-400 II is much faster) and, with the addition of extenders, it drops further. The electronics are also of old conception, so even coupled with a camera with high-performance autofocus, the optics can be the bottleneck, as far as autofocus is concerned. Not surprisingly, one of the improvements of the IS and, above all, IS II versions is the autofocus. The lens has an electronically controlled manual focusing system: it is possible to vary the travel of the ring, i.e. the ratio between the angle of rotation of the ring and that of the usm motor. This makes it interesting for video applications. In addition to the usual focus distance limiters, there is also a useful focus preset: this function allows you to memorize a focus distance, and to make the lens return to that position: this is very useful if you photograph subjects at a great distance, and want to avoid unnecessary focusing. This feature is not usable with Canon mirrorless cameras (M or R), however. The dimensions are completely similar to those of a 300mm f2.8 today. As for the weight, there is a difference between this and the ef 300mm f2.8 L II usm there is about 500g of difference. The handling is good, although the weight (and the imbalance towards the front) is noticeable. Personally, I use a pistol grip connected to the tripod mount, to have greater stability in the management of the optics. Last but not least, there is the question of assistance. The lens has been out of the market since 1999, and Canon has not supplied spare parts for decades (except perhaps for a few screws): the example I bought had a worn coupling flange, which caused excessive play and consequent errors on the camera side, but the component was nowhere to be found. On the contrary, Canon modified the internal part of the coupling flange, during production, so there was also the problem of finding the correct spare part: fortunately the seller saved me, who had another ef 300mm f2.8 L usm, from which he took the coupling flange (worn, but less than mine). This, with all due respect to those who claim that L-series optics are eternal or similar amenities. All it takes is the wear of a relatively trivial component to find yourself with a problem that cannot be solved, if spare parts are not found. Personally, I knew what I was up against, and I took the risk, but personally I wouldn't use such a perspective on a professional level. In other words, if you need it for work, I think it's better to aim for something newer. |
 | sent on 01 Gennaio 2023 Pros: Sharpness, Brightness, Price, Colors Cons: Tropicalization and weight Opinion: I recently bought this beautiful lens kept in a maniacal way, it has no sign anywhere. The price is very interesting for an optic, yes old, with a sharpness and a speed of AF excellent( it is clear that the newer models are better but this does its duty perfectly). I use it for sports and nature photography, attached to my 1DX makes very good. Good with canon 1x4 II multipliers while slightly losing sharpness with canon 2x III but the AF speed is always very good. Even without IS does not create major inconvenience because it is very stable as a structure and you can use safety times without too many problems, I did the test of 9 photographing a game of Rugby under 17 in the evening and with the lights of the field almost non-existent, open everything to 2.8 and used smooth has produced excellent images taking into account that I had to take most of the photos above 10,000 ISO for the lack of light, a bit of grain is clear but in those conditions he gave his best. |
 | sent on 22 Ottobre 2020 Pros: Sharpness, price Cons: Weight, spare parts, not stabilized Opinion: I use it with the Sony A7RIII via adapter so the AF side doesn't guarantee me the same performance as a canon body, however the AF is reliable and fast enough. Sharp side solves the 42 megapixels already at TA well to become very sharp already at F3.2. An excellent optics. Weight is important and the age of the project makes it difficult to find spare parts. The lack of stabilizer makes it difficult to get under certain shooting speeds by penalising situations with little light. Obviously if you buy such an optics today it is because of the affordable price despite the performance from F2.8 line L. Still a valid choice. |
 | sent on 06 Novembre 2019 Pros: Sharpness, price of the used, smooth and multiplied speed Cons: Given the price of the new or used I would say only the weight Opinion: I bought it used at a good price . I use it with the kenko 2x pro glued night and day. The quality is excellent and quietly compares with optics that cost as much as a studio apartment. Considering the production date and for those who can't spend so much this is the alternative to have a 300 2.8 excellent and a 600 f5.6 multiplied by quality that from the best to f8 and a soft hair to 5.6. I replaced my 400 5.6 just because I'm a shed photographer and because 200mm more i'm comfortable. Not recommended for traveling photography because of its weight that makes itself felt especially with pro bodies. The stabilizer at that price can't be asked at all but thanks to its brightness and the possibility to match pro bodies that can travel even to 3200 iso with excellent quality I would say you do not miss it because you can use times of Security. |
 | sent on 06 Novembre 2019 Pros: Optical quality, sharpness, blurry Cons: Only the weight Opinion: I bought it used three years ago and it's really great. I used it for sports photography (football, rugby, minirugby) both smooth and with extender (1.4 II and 2 III). The quality and the AF are really good and precise. The sharpness is almost upsetting and remains good with the 1.4, while losing a bit with the 2x. It's a real tank. I accidentally fell into the water about 3 years ago while photographing the fooches. Brought to repair, disassembled and cleaned the lens is back again and works perfectly. |
 | sent on 23 Marzo 2017 Pros: f / 2.8 and AF speed Cons: MF electronic, weight, not tropical conditions and lack of stabilization. Opinion: Optics definitely dated but still fully usable by and large very beautiful and usable nitidezza.rnColori with multipliers without large losses of unique risoluzione.rngli defects on my way to photograph are the lack of stabilization freehand and given the weight is felt and lack of tropicalizzazione.rnAttualmente Canon stopped producing spare parts and therefore given that even in manual focus the AF motor is used to focuse, if you were to break remains unusable. |
 | sent on 08 Marzo 2014 Pros: Objective razor sharp, autofocus speed appropriate to the natural subjects in motion. rnDopo 25 years yet precise autofocus and optical quality insuperata.rnColori magnificent, typical of artificial fluorite. Cons: My lens suffers from inaccuracy in the manual that do not use maf mai.rnObiettivo heavy (2850 g) when compared with the current model (2250g). RnMaf autofocus a bit 'slow 2X.rnLeggera with slight underexposure and vignetting at full aperture (1 / 3 stops). Opinion: It was a great purchase, even considering that paid him as a family car. rnAncora today I do not feel the need to replace it. RNLA highest quality allowed me to use it almost always with the 1 .4 X old.rnCon buying the 2X III, the yield is quite good and use with this duplicator has become very frequente.rnPur having a very strong objective, we must consider before you buy that used the canon (written with a lower case c) no longer manufactures replacement parts for this model. It will be more than enough to test it thoroughly before buying, in particular the efficiency and accuracy of autofocus. |
 | sent on 01 Agosto 2013 Pros: A Great image quality, which remains even with both teleconverters entered. Cons: The weight and the lack of weather sealing. Opinion: I believe this perspective very valuable despite his age. Sharpness also great with teleconverter, I use it for a short time but I must say that the satisfactions that has already given me are many. The lack of stabilizer do not find it a problem, just shoot at times in keeping with a telephoto lens or use the cavalletto.rnVoto 10 |
 | sent on 18 Aprile 2013 Pros: Sharpness - Great Defocused Cons: Lack of Stabilization - Tropicalisation Opinion: A lens that despite his years he has yet to tell her, especially when it comes to defining and nitidezza.rnUn for short-haired bird without using the extender but also accopiandolo to them I do not see significant declines in quality (1.4X), especially if you used with the Canon EF 600mm 2X Series III.rnUn. F5.6 that does not betray the expectations fact, even closing of only 1 stop, sharpness remains at levels eccellenti.rnLa lack of sealing forces you to look one by adverse conditions, lack of stabilization instead feels the least especially if, like me , it is mainly used on a tripod or (freehand) in camera mode Manual with times higher than 1/1250.rnConsiglio: if you find it will not be a wrong Approach to Buy, actually a fake old man who gives a hard time to his new competitors. rnParere personal: as sharpness I find it higher than the first series stabilized .... Just try it ..! |
 | sent on 09 Aprile 2013 Pros: Sharpen blurry good use freehand. Cons: Often short (without tc) for photography naturalistica.rnProblemi for spare parts and tropicalization absent. Opinion: Considered the best super telephoto Canon as sharpness, until the advent of the next generation. I do not know if it's the best but it is certainly valid, I use it for 20 years and this is the second, I do not feel the difficulty of stabilizing because I use it often on the stand, excellent yield with 1.4 x that turns into a great 420 and in my case mounted on an EOS 1 Mark IV 540, made very good excellent blur the bracket to mount it on a tripod definitely superior to the new. rnCredo now to be one of the few to use it. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
