Please - would you who are experts here maybe advice me about if to upgrade from my newly purchased Canon EF 300 f/2.8L IS USM to version II?

[neuroanatomist]

RE the drop in polarizer, IMO a polarizing filter really give your images pop in some situations - I think it's an essential part of a kit. For the superteles, the drop-in CPL from Canon is the only option.


So, I'd definitely recommend getting one...the problem is that there do not seem to be any available.

[Richard Lane]

Hello and welcome to the forums,


There's not much difference between the bare lenses, as you can see in the charts below:


300mm f/2.8 IS vs. 300mm f/2.8 IS II


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=249&Camera=453&Sample=0&am p;FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=739&CameraComp= 0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0





However, there is more of a difference once you start adding the converters, 1.4X extender below:


300mm f/2.8L IS with 1.4X extender) @ f/4 @420mm Version I vs. Version II.


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=249&Camera=453&Sample=0&am p;FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=739&CameraComp= 453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0





There is even more of a difference with the 2X extender below:


300mm f/2.8L IS with (2X extender) @f/5.6 @600mm


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=249&Camera=453&Sample=0&am p;FLI=2&API=2&LensComp=739&CameraComp= 453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=1


I have the 300mm f/2.8L IS and at this time I don't have any plans of upgrading to the version II model. If I do upgrade it will be to a 400mm, 500mm or 600mm version II in the future.


I would definitely get the CPL, as it cuts glare off of the water and glass, and it also improves colors and contrast when shooting in the mid-afternoon.


Rich

[ZoeEnPhos]

Hello Rich!


Thank you Rich for your excellent advice and links!





Quoting you Rich in what you wrote about your own plans : "I have the 300mm f/2.8L IS and at this time I don't have any plans of upgrading to the version II model. If I do upgrade it will be to a 400mm, 500mm or 600mm version II in the future." - also gave me further support to the same thought I had when thinking about upgrading to the version II - that maybe one of the a bit longer lenses could be useful addition - because I do wish to learn how to capture birds (also in flight) - and I don´t think any wildlife photographer - and especially bird photographers has seldom complained of having too much of millimeters on their telephoto lenses! Birds and wild animals seems to be quite hard to get close to!


The Canon EF Extender 2X III is making the difference - I can clearly see that my Canon 300mm f/2.8L version I is not that crisp compared to when using my EF 1.4X III also only loosing one stop. (With 7D it will be a 672mm f/4L)


I do also use two camera bodies of Canon and of course with 7D I get the crop-factor benefit of 1.6X without loosing a stop. But 5DMkII is giving more in return.





Thank you all for your good and wise contributions!


May you all have a very good day and much joy in your personal photography!


Best Regards,


Charl


Sweden

[Fast Glass]

Here I go again. ;-)


Actually you are losing 1 1/3 stops of light with the 7D. If you compare your 7D too your 5D II for noise you will find the 7D about 1 1/3 stops worst noise.


Assuming the same sensor technology, if depth of field is the same the noise is the same regardless of sensor size. The 7D has slightly better sensor technology but not enough to make any reall world difference. If you want the best reach in a camera body the 1D IV has the best sensor technology. I did a comparison and off the top of my head it was about 2/3 to 1 stop better than the 7D. But don

[ZoeEnPhos]

Hello John!


Thank you John so very much for your excellent observations and completely new insights for me from the facts you wrote to me!


Yes I have to admit that I can almost with barely eyes see that there is a remarkable differences in IQ real life between 5DMKII compared to the images captured with the same EF-lenses on different camera bodies. Yes maybe I should buy the 1D IV - and is this a fullframe only or do the 1D IV a crop-sensor camera=?


The conclusion is then that there is no short cuts to get real-life high IQ with crop-sensor cameras compared with fullframe cameras.


For example I find myself avoiding Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II and I rather use in real life in the field and outdoors instead the better Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L, because it delivers better IQ compared with the 14mm even version II when I closely work with them in my computer! I still lack a good 24mm and I have even avoided to purchase the EF16-35mm Version II ...I think I should go with L-primes rather...but I found the light weight EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM with one flourite lens element to BETTER than my new EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM II - and this lens is now for a check up at the Canon Service center here in Stockholm because it could not deliver as sharp images compared to the excellent EF 70-200 f/L IS USM ...but again that may only be the case with this one I got now for only about two months ago...but I think the version II of EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS USM should be at least AS SHARP as the older 4L IS USM=?


By the way I do not yet have the Adobe Lightroom 3 and maybe I would need that - I only use the Canon´s own software and the the simple Adobe Photoshop CS0 in where I work with .tif.


I think IQ and sharpness and no CA is very important. When using transparancies I used to have Kodachrome PF25ISO and Velvia ISO50 and mostly Sensia ISO100 and always tripod with Monoball and remote cable re-leaser with the mirror locked up!


I am still struggling with not getting acceptable images even having almost only Canon L-lenses.


So I do appreciate very much your input here John and also I send a big <span style="font-size: medium;"]<span style="background-color: #ffff99;"]THANK to Rich and HDNiteHawk and neuroanatomist for all good input here! This forum certainly is a very nice and good one!


May you all have a very very good day and may your photography give you all much joy!


Kind Regards,


Charl


Sweden

[HDNitehawk]

Yes maybe I should buy the 1D IV - and is this a fullframe only or do the 1D IV a crop-sensor camera=?

It is not 1.6 or full frame. The crop on the 1D IV is 1.3.

For example I find myself avoiding Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II and I rather use in real life in the field and outdoors instead the better Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L, because it delivers better IQ compared with the 14mm even version II when I closely work with them in my computer! I still lack a good 24mm and I have even avoided to purchase the EF16-35mm Version II ...I think I should go with L-primes rather...but I found the light weight EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM with one flourite lens element to BETTER than my new EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM II - and this lens is now for a check up at the Canon Service center here in Stockholm because it could not deliver as sharp images compared to the excellent EF 70-200 f/L IS USM ...but again that may only be the case with this one I got now for only about two months ago...but I think the version II of EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS USM should be at least AS SHARP as the older 4L IS USM=?

I had a 14mm for a few days and it was very sharp. I think if this is a real concern for you, stay away from the zooms. The primes are much sharper. The 16-35mm II is a fine lens, but you will get better quality out of the 24mm F1.4 II L and the 35mm F1.4L.

I am still struggling with not getting acceptable images even having almost only Canon L-lenses.

I don't know what to tell you here. The L series lenses are the top of the line. If you are looking just at the best IQ, primes are better than zooms. I own the 70-200mm Version II, it is the top of the food chain when it comes to zooms.

[Fast Glass]

Can you post an example of what you are struggling with?


John.