Customer Reviews

Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM Telephoto Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

5 star:		(29)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

If you're looking at this lens, you're ready to spend some serious dollars. Is it worth it? Short answer, yes, but I'll elaborate.

I've shot with a variety of Nikon and Canon lenses for about 25 years. The 300 f/2.8L IS is without a doubt the sharpest lens I've ever had, and it is unbelievably consistent across every aperture. With the 1.4X Canon extender - other its becoming an f/4 lens - I could not see any appreciable change in its performance. Unbelievable.

I got my introduction to image stabilization on the 70-200 f/2.8L IS, and it is even more useful on the 300. I handheld consistently crisp shots at 1/60 and sometimes at 1/30. With my old Nikon 300 mm, anything below 1/250 was out of the question and 1/500 was a good idea. The whirring of the IS is a bit louder on the 300 than the 70-200.

When shooting action in AI Servo mode, the autofocus was as fast as on my shorter prime lenses.

In some forums, people swear by third party long lenses that they say produce as good an image at less than half the cost. All I can say is that their experience probably reflects the limitations of their skills rather than the comparability of the lenses.

With the 1.4X extender and my 1D Mark IIN's 1.3X FOVCF, this becomes a 546 mm lens. On a 1.6X FOVCF camera it's a whopping 672 mm.

Here are some other Canon alternatives and why you might want to go with them instead of the 300 f/2.8L IS:

- Canon 300 f/4L IS - less than half the price; it is lighter and has a built-in lens hood that doesn't require assembly; you lose a stop, and while a very sharp lens, not in same class at the f/2.8. good choice if you don't have the money for the f/2.8 or want to spread it among other lenses.
- Canon 400 f/2.8L IS - a longer reach without losing a stop but the price and weight increase significantly; not really hand-holdable; lens of choice for outdoor sports action.
- Canon 500 f/4L IS - if you want to shoot birds, you'll need the extra reach. It's cheaper than the 400 2.8 but a couple thousand more than the 300. Sharpness is comparable to the 300.
- Zoom lenses (70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS; 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS) Cheaper, lighter and more flexible but a serious compromise on image quality vs. 300 f/2.8L IS.

Best argument against the 300 f/2.8L is that you won't shoot often enough at that focal length or you want to buy more lenses for the money.

I'm saving my pennies now to add the 500 f/4L IS for bird and other wildlife distance shooting. It will take a few years.

If you're considering this lens then you must already have, or can get the means in which to pay for it. With that being said... GET IT!! I waited and am kicking myself for doing so. Sure the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS L series I bought at the time is still a GREAT lens, I just wished I'd have had this for the last 3 months. Esp if you add a 2x canon tele-converter. or if you have one of the camera's with the cropped sensors. I can tell you that my 5D loves it. The pictures as stated before are tack sharp and when you crop for that KILLER shot whooo baby. If you have any doubt, I would suggest trying to rent one first, but I tell you..... if you do rent one, you will end up buying one. It is simply that good.

This lens is very fast, it can focus very rapidly and follow accurately flying birds, this is the main reason I bought this lens. It excels in every respect, it can be hand held, very sharp even when the aperture is wide open, image stabilization is excellent and it is very fast lens, fast focusing. It can be used to photograph butterflies, dragonflies as I tested it on my 1.6 crop factor camera and found that it can photograph a 15 by 10cm rectangle, thus I can say that it has a maximum magnification of 1:6.7.
This is an expensive lens, so if you think you will use it only occasionally, then I advice you not to buy it, otherwise it worth the price.

The biggest factor in making this purchase was the F/2.8. I had thought about the F/4 version but losing the AF with a 2x TC on my 20D was the deal breaker for the F/4. That and I knew I'd be always questioning myself later on down the road.

I just can't believe how sharp this lens is even wide open. The weight can take some getting used to and having a grip on your body helps out with the balance of it.

One word of warning though, if your a hobbyist and decide it's to expensive to buy, never rent one. If you do, chances are you may not be satisfied with any of the other offerings once you see the results from this lens.

I frequently shoot motorcycles on the street and track. Last racing season, I rented this lens several times and fell in love with it. It has fantastic sharpness and great reach--which can be augmented with the 1.4x teledapter or the occasional 2.0x. (Throw in a camera with a 1.6 crop, and you've got a looong lens.) The two mode IS and the relatively light weight make this a great lens for doing pan shots. For setups where steadiness is required, the central monopod/tripod mount helps maintain the camera's balance although having a heavy camera (1DmkIIN or a 20D with a battery grip) helps.

This lens was worth every penny.

I bought this lens for sports photography. The Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM Super Telephoto Lens for Canon SLR Cameras is the classic sports photographer's lens, but it's almost twice the money and twice the weight. This was a compromise, and it's one I don't regret.

Even so, this is a pretty heavy lens. It may be hand-holdable for some, but not for me. I almost always use a tripod or monopod, or brace it against something. With a monopod, it's easy to handle; I routinely use it to photograph 3-hour baseball games, and don't get tired.

Because it's so heavy and bulky, it's not the kind of lens you bring with you casually. But I've found myself using it for a lot more than sports. Photographing flowers, say, to get that beautiful bokeh. I got some nice photos of the moon with it during the last eclipse.

The sheer size of this lens does attract attention. People are always coming up to me and asking if I'm a reporter. The results are worth it, though. You'll get shots that are simply impossible with a lesser lens.

(I have not had any problem taking this lens, with monopod, into spring training games and minor league baseball games. They will hassle you at some major league stadiums. If you want to photograph big league games, the Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Telephoto Lens for Canon SLR Cameras might be a more practical choice. It's much smaller and lighter. No image stabilization, but is far easier to hand-hold.)

UPDATE: I've since had a chance to use the Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM Telephoto Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras, and it may be an even better choice for sports photography. It is smaller, though just as heavy. The extra speed makes up for the shorter length, especially for night games. You can also use an extender and get almost the equivalent of the 300mm.

As good as it gets. Fast AF, image stabilization (that works), great color & contrast, and works well with the 2X extender making it a 600mm f5.6. It is expensive, but if you need a fast super telephoto with unbelievable image quality this is it.

Can be effectively handheld for short periods, but best used with a tripod or monopod.

If you check around you will find that this lens holds its resale value quite well, although most people that do part with this lens will later regret selling it.

There are only a few on-line vendors I trust when ordering something of this cost. In the 10 years I've ordered from Amazon they have always not only honored their return policy, but on one occasion when the manufacturer was slow to help with a defect Amazon agreed to a refund well after the 30 day return policy had expired.

If you are unsure, try renting first. As another poster mentioned, other lenses will pale in comparison.

Love:

- Sharp wide open and that is what counts (sharpens nicely with software).
- Sharpens more when stopped down an f-stop (outstanding resolution).
- Fast auto focus (fastest I have seen).
- Solid build (switches and rings are precise without play).
- Replaceable flat front glass which protects the adjacent UD element.
- Autofocus stop buttons.
- Dust and water resistant.
- Programmable preset focusing.
- Removable tripod collar.

Like:

- Optical image stabilization (wish it had the newer 3-4 stop version).
- Hard case (good for storing lens in your house, vehicle or airplane).
- A good way to meet nice strangers (especially the ladies) who approach and raises questions about the lens.

Dislike:

- E-145 lens cap (will dislodge if lens is carried in the field with the hood reversed).
- Paint will come off on the barrel at the ET-120 lens hood contact point.
- Need to buy Canon touch up paint to repaint lens hood contact point on barrel.
- Not a dislike but the strap's buckle can scratch the prism housing (position the buckle close to the lens away from the camera).
- Weight (not really hand holdable and needs at least a monopod).
- Cost (but it's faster and sharper than the Canon 300/4 versions).

This is the sharpest and fastest autofocus lens in my collection. The 70-200/4 IS is a close second.

Please refer to my uploaded photos

This is a beast of a lens that can create some incredibly sharp images. Bolted to my Canon 7D (an APS sized sensor) this works out to be a 480mm f2.8 (35mm equivalent) lens. I have never seen images this sharp in my life.

My primary use for this lens was football, night games. I now completely understand why professional sports photographers own this lens; it worked as easily in daylight as under stadium lights.

I'd like to share bit of advice for the person considering this lens for football photography. This is probably way more lens than you want. With an APS sensor, like those on a Canon 7D, 60D, or the Rebel digital line, the telephoto is really too extreme. I found myself backing way off to get decent pictures, more like 30, 40, or 50 yards. The 200mm f2.8 USM with no image stabilization is an inexpensive (compared to this lens) alternative. I would guess that the 200mm f2.0 IS lens is more expensive but probably just as amazing as this 300mm. The 70-200mm f2.8 IS zoom is probably a good lens, but likely gives up some sharpness.

You absolutely have to use a monopod with this lens, at nearly 6 pounds for the lens alone; it is hard to imagine holding the camera steady enough under stadium lights. And then let's not talk about the muscles required to hold this thing up. I did discover why professionals put their left hand on top of the lens instead of holding the monopod handle; it is much easier to aim this beast and the weight adds stability to the lens.

The focus is wicked fast. I imagine the camera body has a little to do with this speed, but the combination of super fast motors, focus limit switch, and huge light gathering is a major benefit. This speed is a good thing and a bad thing. Whenever a ref ran in front of the camera, the focus is so fast; it almost acquired focus on the ref. The bad part, I don't normally take pictures of refs, and would prefer the players to stay in focus. The good part, if a player is moving fast in any direction, this lens keeps up with focus perfectly.

How sharp is this lens? In daylight, I took a waist up picture of a person, essentially filling the frame. I can count the hairs on their arm. An image of a waterlilly, filled about half the frame, with a 3 inch dragon fly on the flower. I can count the barbs on the bug's legs. There is absolutely no chromatic aberration, no blue fringing around white highlights.

For something this expensive, even if you have the money, it is a really good idea to rent one of these first. This is a very special lens. I've never seen sharper images and faster focus. But it is a beast; you certainly won't have to lift weights at the gym after lugging this around for three or four hours. It is also a very good idea to read the owner's manual, there are some buttons and switches that are just not intuitively obvious.

It appears that Canon has announced a replacement for this lens, lighter weight and a third setting for image stabilization. If this lens goes through a price reduction, it will be a steal (the new lens sounds like evolution).

Let's just recap what all the reviews say about this lens in one word: perfect.

My review won't add too much more to what's already been said, but I will point out a few things about this lens that I really like.

+ It's the sharpest piece of glass I've ever seen. This lens is sharper wide open than my 100-400 at 300mm stopped down to f/8.

+ It has 3 focus limiter switches. This takes a while to get used to, but it also makes the autofocus incredibly fast especially for distant moving targets.

+ It takes a 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverter incredibly well. Even with the 2x attached, the lens is still very sharp. When using the focus limiter, the autofocus with the 2x is still fast enough to capture birds in flight handheld. There's no appreciable difference with this lens bare and with the 1.4x teleconverter.

+ Attached to my 1D2, the autofocus is so fast I can't visually keep up with it sometimes. Yes, it's that darn awesome, and no I'm not kidding...

+ The focus preset system is not really intuitively clear, however, once you get it down, it's really really helpful for setting up your shots when you know where your target is going to be. Bigtime plus for tracking faster subjects in predictable paths.

There are no cons to this lens except one. It's HEAVY. I use mine on a tripod or monopod, however it can be use handheld even with the 1.4 attached for a good amount of time especially if you've got stronger arms and can hold it up.

Overall, if I could give this lens 10 stars out of 5, I would. I was worth every single penny.