<<SNIPPED>>
> I know the non-IS version is supposed to be a razor sharp lens...is the IS
> version as well. Isn't it too bad the f2.8 IS is so expensive!!!!
>
>
Hi Howard,
I own an original EF 300 2.8L and an EF 300 4L IS and have used several of
the EF 300 4L non-IS version lenses (rentals). The old fashioned EF 300
2.8L (non IS), was clearly the best of the Canon 300L lenses before the EF
300 2.8L IS came out by a long shot. When the EF 300 4L IS came out Canon
claimed that it was as good or better than the EF 300 4L. So when the 300
IS came out I rented one for a week of shooting and compared it to the
non-IS lens, I was shocked to see that images shot with the IS version were
not nearly as sharp as the non-IS version. I tried another IS lens thinking
that maybe this was a fluke but the second lens was exactly the same. Then
magazines started testing the EF 300 4L IS and nobody who tested the IS
version in the lab could say the IS version was better as all tests
indicated that the IS version was clearly not as good. So until I get my
hands on an EF 300 2.8L IS I'll reserve judgment as Canon has lied before on
IS and lens performance to promote the technology.
What I can tell you that the EF 300 4L IS version has noticeably less
contrast which makes images look noticeably less sharp even in the real
world. My comparisons were made using ISO 100 transparency films which is
mostly what I like to shoot. If your color lab is not absolutely the best
you probably won't see much of a difference in image quality. This is due
to poor C-41 lab consistency, most people here on the EOS list are comparing
prints and can't see a difference unless they have a really good lab or
shoot slides.
The EF 300 4L is an excellent lens IMO, smaller, lighter and MUCH less
expensive then the EF 300 2.8L but even the EF 300 4L cannot shoot the same
images at low light or blow out the background or go to 600mm with full AF
(with EOS 1N/RS family bodies), the EF 300 4L is also not quite as sharp and
crispy as the EF 300 2.8L. Comparing the EF 300 4L to the EF 300 4L IS
there is a noticeable difference but if you shoot mainly print films you may
not really see the difference. The EF 300 2.8L image quality even on prints
is noticeably better than the EF 300 4L IS assuming that you used an
appropriate shutter speed or camera support anyway.
Regards,
Chip Louie
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
