kyle_joyce

Subject: Response to old 300 F4 significantly sharper than IS version?

Here are some reviews and comparison links. I would like a 300 and im still debating.

http://www.cmpsolv.com/cgi-bin/output.cgi

http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm,Primes/PLS_3111crx.aspx

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showgallery.php?cat=2

http://xoomer.virgilio.it/ripolini/300_MTF_tests.htm

http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/300mm/

also photodo.com

it seems from all i have read the non-IS is moderately sharper, especially at f/4 but as far as the degree i guess it depends on the use and size of prints and the chance of having a subpar model (i have no idea about product variability)

but photodo's results is the most drastic difference but i guess user reviews take in the effect of IS in some degree.

too bad canon doesn't currently offer the non-IS for 700-800 new. also did a tripod collar come standard with the old version? (that is around a 100 dollar value)

kyle

ps how does the 70-200 f/4 perform with a 1.4 teleconverter at 280 wide open?

I would like a prime 300 for shooting little league games with an elan 7.

I shoot 60% handheld, 30% on a bean bag propped on a fence, and 10% through a fence bracing it with my hand and fence.

Usually I use 100 speed film at 750-1000, or 400 speed at 750-3000, with print film.

Which would you recommend? the IS or non IS?

Also does any store have new non IS or would i have to get it used?

Thanks

I found another option

slik Pro 700DX with head for 130

or Bogen 3011 and 3047 pan head for 180

what do you think?

thanks

I've been taking pictures of little league games using an Elan 7 and

the 100-300 f5.6 non-L non-USM which I got from b&h used.

What difference can I expect if i went with a 70-200 f4 with a 1.4

teleconverter as far as image quality and focusing speed.

The 100-300 doesn't handle focusing on moving subjects if they are

running to or from my direction, but the image quality is acceptable-

good.

Thanks

Kyle

I'm looking to get a good tripod but i don't want to spend but 100-

200 for it. (I don't plan on hiking much so weight isn't a big issue)

The Slik Pro 700 looks like they way to go from reviews.

Do you have any comment or suggestions for me?

Should I get the Slik head or another brand, suggestions?

I'm not sure if i should get a ball head or pan and tilt.

I plan on using it for posed portraits, landscapes, and eventually

macro (will it work with the short center column addition?).

Thanks

Kyle

I've been taking little league shots and plan on selling them, so i have used several rolls and different styles.

Sometimes costco (In store) does good, sometimes just ok.

Reala has worked best but i haven't used as many rolls of Reala.

Superior 400 has worked good also. (10 bucks for roll of 36 double prints)

Costco send off (Qualex, has done ok with Kodak but the Fugi Superior 400 has seemed to be dark). (6 bucks 36 roll double prints)

Both did good with the UC 400, but I only use one roll at each place.

I'm picking up film tonite from Ritz camera So I'll post how they do. (they are 12-13 for double print 36 roll)

I have an Elan 7 and currently use a 100-300 f5.6 (non L version)for

little league baseball. I'm trying to figure out how to upgrade.

I shoot at 300mm 90% of the time and usually shoot at f5.6 - f8. But

I would like to get better quality pictures (sharper images and more

background blur, better autofocus also).

If I get the 200 f2.8 I would have to get a teleconverter for

baseball.

I also hope to branch out and take some soccer, football, swimming

and maybe basketball (indoors if possible).

What do you recommend? Also do you shoot sports? and Which lenses

have you tried? Any other advice is appreciated.

Thanks

Kyle

oh, i think the 500 dollar one on b&h is an FD version.

At photographyreview.com most people who have reviewed the lense lately has purchase it used from 275-400.

http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm,Zoom/Canon,EF,100-300mm,f-5.6L/PRD_83409_3128crx.aspx

i might be nervous about getting one on ebay.

i got the non L version for $150 on b&h, to shoot little league games. Actually ebay might not be bad the lense i got at b&h was an 8+ but it did have a small scratch on the front of the lense and some dust behind the first element.

but i did see the L version on b&h the other day, im pretty sure it was 500, it sold by the next time i checked the used section.

i just wish they made a current 100-300L.

Check the use section on B&H and adorama daily, maybe one will pop up.

kyle

I had to change films mid roll so i rewound one roll leaving the

lead so i could finish the roll later.

But i cannot figure how to advance to the next unused frame.

Does anyone know?

Thanks

Kyle

Well I'm probably going to use Costco because they are so much cheaper than other labs.

The results probably wont be as good but financially it probably doesn't make sense to use a pro lab for several rolls. (not many parents are going to be that critical, i figure)

They use Fuji paper and a Frontier.

I might try more film and compare the results.

4x6 mainly also 5x7's and 8x10's

thanks

Im starting to take and sell pictures of Little League Games.

I've been using Superior 400, I have also tried Portra UC 400, NPH

400 (but haven't had them processed yet)

Do you think I should use 400 speed or try slower or faster film

(Maybe NPS 160?).

I use a Canon Elan 7 with a 100-300 f5.6 usually at 300 and 5.6, most

of the time the shutter speed is 1/2000 - 1/3000.

Thanks

Can anyone recommend a Lab in NC for processing?

I'm looking for both Slide and Print 35mm.

Also I would like to know of a Lab that does good enlargements (8x10 -

20-24) of slides. I know alot of people recommend drum scanners but

i don't know of one.

Around Winston, Greensboro and Highpoint are all convenient.

Thanks