Dont buy new stuff?

[jrw]

i realize that you were talking about sharpness in the beginning, but that is only one part of the image quality difference and quite frequently one of the smallest areas of difference. One of the easiest areas to see differences between versions of lenses in ANY size or resolution of image is flare followed by CA. Given the number of lenses that show substantial improvements in these areas with each successive version I can see the initial challenge could get rather costly at a $100 a pop. Covering a lot of outdoor sports events myself I can really appreciate the improvements in the coatings when at the start/finish line in the early mornings and late in the day.

[Mickw]

True i didnt specify it had to be a naked lens as i thought anyone who wanted top quality would never use a x2 converter but use the lens appropriate for the job. Sorry, for any confusion. As for cost etc, i never mentioned cost. I never mentioned converters. I'm trying to point out that the new lens to all but the most highly critical pro in a very limited photo op isnt worth the upgrade. Just like the last post, yes it has some advantages to a very small segment of the market, highly critical pros shooting in very poor light conditions. For us mere mortals we will never tell the differance. I know my friend who covers the most watched pro soccer in the world English Premier League isnt upgrading. What does that say? Hes never experienced a problem with flare and you always shoot on a monopod/tripod with a 500 due to its length and weight. 1.5 lbs will make very little differance. If im wrong then when i watch the upcoming Olympics i expect the pros to be shooting hand held with the new 500.

[Steve U]

My local camera shop has asked for a moderator to remove this thread, but my wife wants it printed and framed.

[HDNitehawk]

Steve; I had to think on this a bit but..
He only wants it removed because he wants you to buy new stuff...
and we know why the wife wants it framed

I have a feeling she wouldn't want you talking to me

[Steve U]

Yes you are a bad influence....
Of course Canon don't agree with that statement.

[jrw]

I am finding it interesting how this thread has migrated from purely a sharpness comparison to looking at so many other things that contribute to an improvement in lenses. On the new uber telephotos there is one other new feature that is an improvement. It won't show up in the photos but it will increase the number of acceptable shots. The Mode 3 for IS is something that makes it easier to consistently get the shots framed the way you want them. Is the new 300 a must have upgrade? Probably not for many owners of the original. That was, and still is, a very nice lens. Compared to the 300 f4 that I've had for some time, well that's another story. If I had the choice today of buying the original 300 or the new version, I am quite certain I'd go with the new version. The IQ is a bit better, it plays better with TCs which matters to me, IS is improved which with the lighter weight improves handholdability immensely, and the new paint colour would just seal the deal of course.

@Steve U I must have really lucked out with my wife. She still encourages me to buy new toys!!! Of course, she seldom asks what is written on the price tag and she frequently goes shopping after nudging me off the fence of indecision. Hmmm....

[Steve U]

Ahh bless her JRW, you're a lucky man.
I tried the, "what this old thing?" line the other day, but it didn't work on my new 15L Lowepro Flipside back pack. Mainly because it is a bright blue colour and is very hard to sneak past anyone with.
BTW, the back pack is very good, very light and very secure.
Oops and it is new stuff, so I am not following the example of OP Mickw. I'm trying but it's hard.

[HDNitehawk]

Steve shame on you for buying new stuff, a sack would have carried your gear just as well as that new bag. But you should remember to ask for plastic not paper when you get one from the store, the paper doesn't hold up as well in wet weather.

Or you could do like these "Pro's" do and just throw your gear on the ground when your not using it;



Nascar Photog 102 by hdnitehawk01, on Flickr

[Mickw]

I have a couple of questions for you guys

Can i ask you whats the best camera you have ever used, the most optically perfect lens setup?

On what basis/experience do you make the statement?

Mick

[FastGass]

The best I have used personally would probably be my 50mm or 100mm primes, both are extremely sharp stopped down. The best that I know of is the new 300mm on a FF, check the ISO crops.

I know a lot of photographers that use 2x teleconverters, Juza is one example. I use one when I can't get close enough for a shot, it's better than cropping so I use it. I have the Minolta 600mm f/6.3 on a 60D so I know why bird photographers need 2x extenders for!

Edit.

I forgot to add, the bokeh does not change when using a teleconverter. You simply crop to acheive a longer focal length and narrower f/number, now if you get closer or used a longer lens with a faster aperture then you will be more background blur. In practice you will get less background in you image and usually a cleaner background which might appear to have more bokeh.

John.