Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Canon RF 100-300 f/2.8 IS USM

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central Kentucky
    Posts
    3,613
    Quote Originally Posted by neuroanatomist View Post
    Here's a quick comparison, and I think the 100-300/2.8 + 2x holds up very well compared to the 600/4 II. The 100-500 is no slouch, either...

    https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/th...-is-usm.42653/
    In those images, I would agree. Those are more of a "bird-scape" style .... my preference with birds to have the subject much bigger in the frame in which case the new 100-300 with the 2X TC may do just fine. Since I already own a 600 f/4 and the RF 100-500 it's not really a lens that's on my want list although it is clearly a stellar piece.

  2. #32
    Senior Member neuroanatomist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    3,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Joel Eade View Post
    In those images, I would agree. Those are more of a "bird-scape" style .... my preference with birds to have the subject much bigger in the frame in which case the new 100-300 with the 2X TC may do just fine. Since I already own a 600 f/4 and the RF 100-500 it's not really a lens that's on my want list although it is clearly a stellar piece.
    If not for this contrived 'test', I would not have brought the 100-300 on a birding outing at all. Outside of testing of this sort, doubt I'll use it with the 2x TC in the future. I can see using it with the 1.4x TC for outdoor field events, a 140-420mm f/4 zoom will be useful in that setting, and under non-pro field lighting the 100-500mm needs ISOs of 12800-25600, so the extra 2/3 – 1-2/3 stops of light will make a meaningful difference.

  3. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central Kentucky
    Posts
    3,613
    Makes complete sense to me!

  4. #34
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    5,553
    Thanks John.....I came across these two images of Bryan's (here and here) with the 100-300 f/2.8 with a 2x TC which are plenty sharp, IMO. The typical fall off in IQ with a 2x TC does not seem to be happening here. But, I was wondering how fast the AF is? Do you see the usual fall off in AF?

  5. #35
    Senior Member neuroanatomist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    3,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Kayaker72 View Post
    Thanks John.....I came across these two images of Bryan's (here and here) with the 100-300 f/2.8 with a 2x TC which are plenty sharp, IMO. The typical fall off in IQ with a 2x TC does not seem to be happening here. But, I was wondering how fast the AF is? Do you see the usual fall off in AF?
    I think it slows down a little with the 2x, but the AF is so fast natively that any difference is barely perceptible.

  6. #36
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    5,553
    Quote Originally Posted by neuroanatomist View Post
    I think it slows down a little with the 2x, but the AF is so fast natively that any difference is barely perceptible.
    Thanks. This seems like a big improvement over previous lenses, especially EF, with a 2x TC. It'll be interesting to see about AF speed and IQ if Canon does release some sort of 0, 1.4, 2x TC.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •