ted_hendy Posted August 18, 1997 Share Posted August 18, 1997 I'm headed to Yellowstone in September, along with quite a few of the rest of you it seems. I know that the Canon 300 mm IS is fairly new and I have been following various groups trying to find out more user information on it. The general consensus so far has been "let's wait and see". Well, I'd like to bring up the topic again to see if there's any new information. I'm specifically interested in two questions: <p> Does it perform optically as well as it's non IS brother? Is there any experience with improper functioning related to the greater number of elements and more sophisticated electronics? <p> I'm planning on purchasing one or the other, along with a 1.4x, in the next week and don't mind spending (don't tell my wife) the extra money on the IS if it is just as good and robust as the non IS version. <p> Thanks in advance,Ted Hendy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_baccus Posted August 18, 1997 Share Posted August 18, 1997 I've not seen an "L" lens yet from Canon that's a dog, and I wouldn't expect this one to be. I've played with one, and the owner was very enthusiastic about it. It seemed every bit as solid as the 300/4. <p> Of course, it has more moving parts and electronics to die, but Canon seems to do a really good job mechanically with its "L" lenses and I wouldn't worry about it. <p> I think the real question to ask is "how often do you intend to shoot handheld or from a shoulder stock?" If the answer is, "I'll always try to use my tripod", then the IS won't help you much. If the answer is, "I want to shoot grab shots, sports shots, flying bird shots, etc without tripod or monopod" then this probably is the lens for you. Actually, I suspect IS helps somewhat on a monopod, too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_meyer Posted August 18, 1997 Share Posted August 18, 1997 Ted, everything I've heard on the 300 IS is that it performs equal to the older 300 f/4 which was about the best you could get. Bob Atkins has a review of the lens at http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/photo/canon/300-4.htmlGood luck. Yellowstone is the most awesome National Park out there and you don't want to skimp on good pictures! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted August 18, 1997 Share Posted August 18, 1997 I presume you read the <a href="http://db.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0000Z7"> 300/4 vs 300/4 IS</a> thread in the original Q&A forum (where you might have gotten more responses to this question!). <p> The only USENET comment I've seen suggested the two lenses performed equally well. Then again, I wouldn't trust USENET comments all that much. None of the magazine "reviews" were worth the paper they were printed on (i.e. they looked like advertising copy, so you really couldn't tell if the reviews were reliable or not). I have heard no negative comments or rumors about the IS version. <p> It's probably worth the extra $500, if you couldn't find a better way to spend the money (like another lens, more film or a better tripod or head). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_storkel Posted August 18, 1997 Share Posted August 18, 1997 Another place the "IS" might be good is when you don't have a stable surface from which to shoot. Planning on riding in a dugout canoe through the Okavango Delta? Shooting from a helicopter flying over Victoria Falls? Image-stabilization might be something to consider... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_wilson2 Posted August 19, 1997 Share Posted August 19, 1997 Don mentions that IS could be a benefit with a monopod. It's also possible that IS would allow you to use a lighter tripod. This could be a real benefit if you're hiking. Of course, the extra $500 could be put towards a Gitzo Mountaineer which would give you the same overall benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_ratermann Posted September 5, 1997 Share Posted September 5, 1997 I don't have any experience with the 300mm Canon, however I do use the 75mm-300mm zoom lens that came out earlier with IS. I think we can expect to see a few more lenses with this stabilizer in it as the versitility of the lens increases remarkably. At 300mm, the stabilizer is a real bonus, handheld speeds at 1/60th are possible. At 75mm however, the shutter speed can go quite low, all this while hand holding. With the on/off switch one can readily see just how much the IS technology works. I'm just glad I have a Canon to enjoy this now, I am sure you will see the other camera manufacturers out with it sometime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitch_pelter Posted October 4, 1997 Share Posted October 4, 1997 You may want to try attaching the 1.4x converter to the 300mm IS lens. A dealer and I were very surprised that the Canon 75-300mm IS lens was not physically connectable to the Canon 1.4x teleconverter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glen_johnson Posted October 4, 1997 Share Posted October 4, 1997 The 300 f/4L IS is made to take the teleconverters. The 75-300 f/4-5.6 IS is not. A dealer that doesn't know this can't be too far away from a former career selling toy trains, or burgers. <p> You can put the teleconverter on the 75-300 IS lens if you also add the 12mm extension tube, but then you lose infinity focus, and the lens is already on the lower edge of its performance at 300, so the extension tube and the teleconverter are sort of last resort items. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_hallett Posted November 5, 1997 Share Posted November 5, 1997 If you intend to handhold this IS lens it will probably be a good investment. I understand from some users that the IS feature does not operate on a stable platform or tripod as some motion is needed to get the gyro to operate. I suppose extremely slow shutter speeds might do the trick on a tripod but some bird shooters I know who owned them said no. Not tried one myself but considering it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted November 5, 1997 Share Posted November 5, 1997 Why would you want the IS to operate when the lens is on a tripod? The tripod does a <b>much</b> better job at stabilizing a lens than the IS system does! <p> The only possible use might be to attempt to compensate for mirror induced vibrations, but I'm pretty sure the amplitude and frequency of those are well outside of the range over which the IS system can compensate. <p> As for "dealers" who don't know the equipment they are selling, it's all too common I'm afraid, unless you are dealing with a really professional store. Most local photo shops and "discount" dealers really don't know very much. My local store didn't know that 120 film was also known as "medium format"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmy_bloomfield Posted November 12, 1997 Share Posted November 12, 1997 I own this lens and enjoy it a lot. For Hand held shoots it is great. At 44 my hands shake some so the lens saves a lot of my pictures.As far as using a tripod , Canon says to turn OFF I.S. when on a tripod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen_feingold Posted November 16, 1997 Share Posted November 16, 1997 I find the 300 IS lens to be remarkably sharp considering my good results using the lens with both the 1.4X & 2X extenders, even with the extenders combined. The IS feature is usable with the 2X extender only on the EOS-1 bodies. It is not enabled on lesser bodies with the 2X. The IS feature works well but there is a time lag and it may not be fast enough for grab shots. The IS is also not recommended when shooting with flash. The lens will focus down to 5 feet, making this a very versatile lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_hester Posted November 20, 1997 Share Posted November 20, 1997 about the time lag of the IS... <p> i rented the IS version a couple of times, but never used it for sports or high speed stuff. i was wondering how the IS worked in "continous fire" mode. i remember that the IS would re-center after i did a single shot picture. what does that mean when i hold the shutter down and fire off 6 shots of an on-coming car? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c._smith Posted December 16, 1997 Share Posted December 16, 1997 Just purchased the 300 IS and 1.4x extender. Shot two rolls of Elite with a variety of nature subjects and flying birds with no tripod. When I get the film back I'll post my review. I have a friend who has the regular 300 . It is a quality lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick_murphy_racey1 Posted December 27, 2000 Share Posted December 27, 2000 It might be a little shortsighted to just talk glass vs. glass. To take full advantage of the differences between these two optics, you really need to be testing on a newer body. If you test both using an EOS1N or an A2, you will see maybe a 10-15% increase in focus speed and accuracy. However, if you are testing both lenses with one of the newer technology riddled bodies (1V, EOS 3, Elan 7), there is a massive jump in performance (as much as 35% depending on the situation). You need to take into consideration your body choice when trying to decide between the two. If you are shooting older EOS gear now and don't plan on getting new bodies soon, then you can catch a great deal on the older style lens used. If you're already shooting a 1V or 7 or even a D30, then you might want to seriously consider dropping the additional coin needed to take full advantage of the newer, better, & faster optics... Just one man's opinion... pat http://wwwpmrphoto.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now