WakeWorld (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/index.php)
-   Video and Photography (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=87667)
-   -   Canon 300 2.8 IS II ?? (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=785144)

skull 12-16-2010 11:46 AM

Canon 300 2.8 IS II ??
Anyone happen to know when the new 300 2.8 IS II and 400 2.8 IS II super telephotos are coming out? No one seems to know. I am interested in the 300 2.8 IS II but not sure how much better it will be than the current 300 2.8 IS which is quite exceptional. I have rented a 300 2.8 once and it was sweet!!!!

wakedad33 12-16-2010 12:55 PM


Found this on Fredmiranda.com in the Canon shooters forum.

"The way Canon's press releases stand today, the 300/400 f/2.8 IS MkIIs will hit the shelves in March 2011.

That is probably the most exciting new lens release in more than a decade......ever since the 1999 supertelephoto lens introduction.

The new lenses are very likely going to be better all around, with a particular emphasis on improved handling, and they are much more expensive than the current versions, at least initially.

One should probably anticipate some sorta initial mini rush to buy. Your usual gear fanatics, aficionados, collectors, "mine is the first copy on FM" etc. will be placing their preorders soon. There is also probably a sizeable contingent of full-time sports photographers who will be buying those lenses as a matter of their yearly hardware update/replacement routine.

I am trying to get a bit of a feel as to the real demand on FM for those lenses shortly after they hit the shelves. I also expect that by Sep. 2011 the price of those two lenses will be adjusted downward, once the keenest will have bought theirs. "

skull 12-17-2010 12:13 PM

Cool, thanks. I predict the new 300 2.8 IS II will jump in price from the $4,400.00 range to around $5,800.00. I'd say they will price it $100 below or $100 above the Nikkor 300 2.8. I have had some insiders tell me the new 70-200 and all of the new super-telephotos are being done to "catch-up" with Nikon price wise. The new 70-200 is substantially more pricey than the 70-200 2.8 IS which I personally have no issues with although I haven't tried the new 70-200 (my wallet is scared to try it).

wakedad33 12-17-2010 1:15 PM

No kidding, I just rented a 500 f/4 IS for a wildlife trip. Damn, that is one sweet piece of glass, now I'm going to have to sell a kidney:D

richd 12-19-2010 6:45 AM

I owned a 300 a few years ago, sold it because I just didn't have any real use for it. It's an amazing lens and works incredibly well with the extenders. The new version with the new extenders should only be better. What are you going to shoot with it? The guy I bought mine from used it for baseball.

skull 12-20-2010 4:48 AM

Rich- I will use it for motorcross, wildlife and even head portraits. It is far more manageable for me to carry around a 300 2.8 with or without 1.4X than my 500 f4 IS. When I carry around the 500 f4 it is always on a tripod with a Wimberley head. I am far better at panning birds in flight hand holding versus tripod mounted. I shot some birds this weekend using my 100-400 hand held and was amazed how much easier it is than using the 500!! I love the 500 stuff on the ground but in flight... I need to keep practicing that.... The 300 2.8 is really the last lens I need to buy for quite a while... I can't see another need after that one.

wakedad33 12-20-2010 5:41 AM

From Rob

"The 300 2.8 is really the last lens I need to buy for quite a while..." :D:D:D Yeah right.

richd 12-20-2010 7:58 AM

Interesting, I'd try the new 70-200 II with/without a 1.4X for motocross and add the 2X (I'm going to order the new 2X III) for BIF. Artie Morris says the new 70-200 with 2X & MKIV is the best BIF combo he has ever used. That's coming from the man that put the 400 f5.6L on the map for BIF. I don't know about the new 300 but the new 70-200 V2 AF's faster then the current 300 f2.8 on a mkIV.

But if you just can't keep your wallet in your pants how about a 200 f2 for portraits and motocross with the new 2X extender for BIF? The 300 with 1.4X would be a little too much for me to handhold for BIF but then again you're younger/stronger! :)

Given the cost of the new superteles I'd want it to shoot everything and wash the truck as well as well! The current 300 has always been one of the bargain supers (I paid $3300 for the one I had) but that's going to change.

skull 12-20-2010 8:32 AM

My bad luck... I just bought 1.4X and 2.0X extenders this year. So, no new extenders for me. I'll have to find that article from Artie. I'd be curious to see how he sets up the 1D4 for BIF. I have my AF set for one point with all of the points around the selected point also active but you can tweak those custom functions all day. I have hand held the 500 for BIF a few times and it worked pretty well but that lens is a bit "much" for that kind of thing. I have never tried a 400 5.6. That is non-IS from what I remember. Thanks for the recommendation. I will try out the new 70-200 sometime!

wakedad33 12-21-2010 6:18 AM

2 Attachment(s)
Like Rich said the 400 5.6 is a great BIF lens, lack of IS can be a challange sometimes, but I've found if I keep my shutter speed up it's fine. I shot some in-flight hand held with a 500 I rented last week and it's doable but it should come with a gym membership:D. I didn't use my Bushawk but think it would improve the keeper rate. To me the biggest advantage I found with the 400 is If I lost a target I can re-acquire it pretty easy, not so with the 500, when it's gone it's gone. That said I loved the 500 f/4 IS and as soon as Alex gets out of college It will be on the top of my new toy list.

Couple of BIF shots with the 500 hand held, I think with some practice (and a Bushawk) it would work pretty well. I know some guys on FM that shoot BIF hand held with the 800mm :eek:

skull 12-21-2010 7:07 AM

Those are great shots. The last time I used my 500 hand held I carried it around for several hours and was really beat afterwords. I may try again during my vacation next week. I use a Wimberey head and still think it is far easier to handhold for BIF. The 500 is sweet. I use it more and more.

richd 12-21-2010 8:00 AM

4 Attachment(s)
Those are some really nice ducks Randy! I've tried BIF with my 500 f4.5 off a monopod and I agree it's a little tougher to find the target and reacquire if you lose it. There's really no substitute for the 400 f5.6 when it comes to that.

The 70-200 with 2X is heavier and the AF a little slower to lock on first shot wise but once it does it seems to AF track a little better then the 400. This is with a MKIV and doesn't necessarily translate to other bodies. It's a faster combo IMHO then the 100-400 all around. The 2 things I like about the 70-200 V2 / 2X that don't translate to the 400 f5.6 is being able to zoom obviously and the IS which gives you BIF keepers below 1/1000th. If you're going to really get into BIF the 400 is a must but 70-200 combo is fine for occasional BIF shooting which is why I sold the 400 I had. As soon as I get my hands on one of the new 2Xs we'll see if that combo can get even better. Here are some 70-200 with 2x shots from Cabo this year.

wakedad33 12-21-2010 5:16 PM

Nice shots Rich! How much crop in the 1st shot, real nice feather detail with that lens/converter combo. Great pose in #3, sucks that the branches got in the way.

The Paytons are coming up to snowboard next week, I'm hopping for at least one bluebird day to get some shots.

We need to go shoot some birds this spring.

richd 12-21-2010 9:48 PM

I don't think I cropped any of those but I'll double check. I realize the branches kind of spoil #3. I liked the fact the AF didn't jump around on that shot given the clutter. I hope someone get's some sun somewhere soon! :0

skull 12-22-2010 5:38 AM

I am heading out this weekend with the 500 for some handheld BIF fun. I had previously used it on a monopod then picked it up when needed to capture BIF. I discovered last night the tripod collar makes it much more uncomfortable to hold when it is in the position for a monopod. This weekend I will rotate the tripod collar to the side of the lens and think it will be much easier to lug around. This thread has got me interested in picking up a 400 5.6 or the new 70-200 IS II. I was pretty happy with the 100-400 but reading reviews and seeing comparisons between the 100-400 and the 400 5.6 has made me intrigued. I'd really like to see the sharpness difference between 400 5.6 and 70-200 IS II with 2X extender!

richd 12-22-2010 7:13 AM

I wish I had done a few more comparison shots between the 2 setup before I sold the 400 f5.6L. Here is one comparison set, both on the MKIV full size jpegs with standard Aperture RAW conversion (no extra sharpening or contrast bumps)

400 f5.6


70-200 V2 with Canon 2X II


I've got a Canon 2X III on the way so we'll see if that improves things any.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 6:37 PM.