Field Tested: the Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS II

I have--thanks to the kindness of the folks at Canon Professional Services (CPS)--especially Paul Ng, been field testing the same Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS II for more than two months. I first used it on my amazing Cheeseman's Southern Oceans trip, then on the SW FLA IPT, and finally on the Japan IPT. It will be returned by Fed-X the afternoon that I get back to the office on March 13th.

I have long given the 300 f/2.8 lenses short shrift. In the original The Art of Bird Photography I wrote something to the effect that the 300 f/2.8s were favored by many of the world's best raptor photographers but that I saw little need for one. In the all new follow-up, The Art of Bird Photography II (16 pages on CD only), I totally ignored these lenses but did include a few Homer eagle images made with one that I had borrowed from CPS. I've learned recently of the incredible potential of the 300 f/2.8L IS lens/1.4X III TC as a flight photography combination.

On my recent Antarctica trip the 300 IS II with the 2X III teleconverter served as my long lens (see the image immediately below) and I used it a lot with and without the 1.4X III TC both on landings and on Zodiac cruises. Carrying it on the long hikes was a pleasure when compared to the long lenses I am used to carrying.... I used the lens sparingly on the SW FLA IPT but my erstwhile assistant Tim Kaufman made a killer image of a Great Blue Heron in flight with a large southern whiting in its bill with it while toting the lens for me at Blind Pass Beach. You can see that spectacular image here.

When I sent a dozen or so JPEGs the image above to Christopher Robinson, editor of Outdoor Photographer, as part of a submission for an article on pros' favorite Canon lenses, he commented via e-mail, "By the way...your Macaroni Penguin image, in particular, is incredible. I think it shows the sharpness of that lens better than anything I've seen. It's an awesome lens and in your hands one can see why it's so highly prized."

And that with the 2X III TC!

What's To Like?

What can I say. The lens is incredibly sharp. Sharp wide open. Sharp edge to edge. Sharp with the 1.4X And yes, sharp with the 2X. When I do everything right--which is often with this lens in my hands--the images seem to leap off the computer screen. At A.B pounds, the lens is just light enough (5.19 pounds, 13% lighter than its predecessor) to hand hold for extended periods of time even though I have had some problems with my shoulders for the past few years. When Peter Kes made the image of me above we were photographing Red-breasted Mergansers swimming and diving. For more than two hours. I held the lens elevated for extended periods of time. When I got back to the motel and took off my sweatshirt I could barely lift my arms; I was very much in pain. It was sort of like what I did by swimming too many laps when my pool was finished.... By the next morning I was fine. On the sea eagle boat trips in Rausu I made sure to rest the lens on the gunnels when I was not actively photographing; having a nice neutral rest position when hand holding relatively heavy gear is always best.

With a maximum aperture of f/2.8, the lens is very fast. There were times on each trip that I was able to keep photographing in low light without going to crazy-high ISOs. Another benefit of all that speed is being able to work with either teleconverter and still have all AF points active. The lens is very versatile as it offers three focal lengths: 300mm, 420mm (with the 1.4X III TC), and 600mm (with the 2X III TC). I have not worked hand held with the 2X much but with enough shutter speed I am sure that competent folks would be able to create sharp action and flight images. For static work, however, it makes sense to be on a sturdy tripod like the Gitzo 3530 LS that I use every day topped by a Mongoose M3.6, the latter was absolutely made for the 300 2.8 lenses.

Idiosyncracies

All four of the Series II telephoto lenses have three Image Stabilization modes: IS 1, IS 2, and IS 3. Here's what Canon has to say about each:

IS Mode 1: Corrects vibrations in all directions. It is mainly effective for shooting still subjects.

IS 2 Mode: Corrects vertical camera shake during following shots (i.e., panning) in a horizontal direction, and corrects horizontal camera shake during following (i.e., panning) in a vertical direction. That means that if you hold the camera on end IS2 will realize what you are doing and stabilize in the correct manner.

IS 3 Mode: Corrects vibration only during exposure. During panning shots, corrects vibration in only one direction same as IS mode 2. They continue: Since camera shake is stabilized only during exposure, following a subject is easier such as when shooting a fast and irregularly moving player during sports photography.

With previous generation super-telephoto lenses I have I advised folks to set IS Mode 2 and forget it whether hand holding or working on a tripod and whether photographing stationary or moving subjects.

On our first day photographing the Snow Monkeys I learned that the Series II super-telephoto lenses are completely different animals. When I set IS 2 Mode and pressed the shutter button while working on a tripod the image jumped all over the place. I thought that the lens might be defective right out of the box.... So I tried IS Mode 3 and all was well with the world. Since then I have left the camera on IS Mode 3 all the time both on a tripod and hand holding and been perfectly happy. If I were photographing a static subject hand held I would try to remember to switch to IS Mode 1. And then to switch back to IS Mode 3.

I have not yet had the opportunity to test the new 4-stop IS system at very slow shutter speeds but I will assume that it will perform as well as it does on the 800mm f/5.6 L IS. (Note: I strongly advise turning IS off when working on a tripod with exposure times of 1/2 second or longer. )

The location of the AF/MF and the limit range switches is odd and takes some getting used to. On the 300 IS II these switches are located to the behind the tripod collar while on all other Canon lenses that I am familiar with they are located in front of the tripod collar. I still reach to the traditional spot when I want go from full focusing range to limited focusing range as is recommended for flight photography; initial AF acquisition is much faster when the lens does not have to search all the way back to the minimum focusing distance.

A final thought from me: for folks with 1.6X crop factor bodies like the EOS-7D and the EOS-50D the 300 2.8 II would not be a bad workhorse lens for bird photography. They would enjoy effective focal lengths of 672 mm with a 1.4X and 960 mm with the 2X TC....

My Only Wish

In an ideal world the tripod collar would be removable making the lens just a bit easier to hand hold. At my age every ounce matters!

Wrong Again?

Though it happens rarely, I never mind admitting that I was wrong. Again. The 300 f/2.8L IS lens is a superb tool for bird photography; it is light enough for most folks to hand hold, it is fast, it is versatile, and it produces stunningly sharp images with incredible fine detail.

Canon's Overview of the 300mm f/2.8L IS II Lens

A worthy successor to the popular Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 IS, the all-new Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 IS II USM super telephoto lens is lightweight, weighing approximately 13% less than its predecessor, yet offers faster operation, improved image stabilization and superior optics. Incorporating Fluorite elements for improved image quality and reduced chromatic aberration plus a number of advanced coatings to minimize ghosting, flaring, and with a newly developed Fluorine coating that keeps soiling, smears and fingerprints to a minimum, the EF 300mm f/2.8 IS II USM is ready to deliver spectacular images in an instant. With a third Image Stabilization mode (Mode 3) that activates IS only when the shutter button is fully pressed, and giving the equivalent effect of a shutter speed four stops faster, the EF 300mm f/2.8 IS II USM allows for easy panning and is ideally positioned for professional action photography. The EF 300mm f/2.8 IS II USM also features a new security slot for wire-type security locks.

You can find links to more info here.

The post was adapted from my March 9th blog post. You can read the original version and check out the eight images that accompany the post.

That's me below hand holding the Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS lens with the 1.4X TC and the EOS-1D Mark IV body alongside the fishing pier at the eastern end of Sanibel, FL. Photo copyright and courtesy of Peter Kes.

Artie...What did you think about the autofocus speed when you had the 2x III attached? In December, I tested the 400mm II with the 2x III and found the autofocus speed was rather slow. In other words, it took longer to acquire the target...quite a bit longer when compared with the 1.4x TC.

Thanks,

Alan
www.iwishicouldfly.com

Alan Stankevitz said:

Artie...What did you think about the autofocus speed when you had the 2x III attached? In December, I tested the 400mm II with the 2x III and found the autofocus speed was rather slow. In other words, it took longer to acquire the target...quite a bit longer when compared with the 1.4x TC. Thanks, Alan

Click to expand...

Initial AF acquisition will always be slower with a 1.4X TC than with the prime lens alone and initial AF acquisition with a 2x TC will always be slower than with the 1.4X. Why? AF needs light to function. The 1.4X TC robs one stop of light, the 2X TC two stops. Combat that by making sure that you have set the limited focusing range and that you pre-focus manually.

Hi Artie,

I understand that TC's slow down the autofocus more-so with the 2x but there are variations with certain combinations of TC's and lenses. For example, the 70-200 f/2.8 II lens with a 2x TC is quite fast at acquiring focus whereas the 400mm f/2.8 II lens + the 2x is not very fast.

Thanks,

Alan

Alan Stankevitz said:

Hi Artie, I understand that TC's slow down the autofocus more-so with the 2x but there are variations with certain combinations of TC's and lenses. For example, the 70-200 f/2.8 II lens with a 2x TC is quite fast at acquiring focus whereas the 400mm f/2.8 II lens + the 2x is not very fast. Thanks, Alan

Click to expand...

I disagree. I would say that initial AF acquisition with the 2X III TC/70-200 f/2.8L IS is very much on the slow side. And again, I have not used the 300/2.8 II with the 2X for flight....

Why does AF slow down with TCs attached?

The commonly cited reason is the loss of light. (Side note: technically, there is no loss of light by adding Tcs. instead the image is magnified so the light is spread out more.) Consider the light levels from full sun to sunset, which is a many stop range. If one does not have a TC on, the speed of AF over that many stop range will not change. It may finally slow down when light gets very very low. Now put on a 2x TC in bright noon sun. AF is slower, but there is more light with that lens+TC at high noon than no TC at sunset. So there must be another reason.

Let's say you rotate the focus ring 10 degrees to focus with no TC, and that moves the focus position in the camera by Z mm. Now add a 2x TC and for that same target, rotating the focus ring 10 degrees results in 2*Z mm focus shift. So commanding the focusing stepper motor, the rate that the motor moves the focus increases when adding TCs. If the signal chain and computer can't handle the increased data, the motor rate would need to be slowed. But it only needs to slow the focus rate equivalent to the same speed as with no TCs. But there is another problem. As you add TCs, the f/ratio increases, making the phase difference between the two sides of the lens a smaller difference. Thus, it is more difficult to determine the correct position. In the original AF systems, they probably slowed the system down with added TCs to maintain accuracy. It is clear that f/5.6 and f/8 and beyond is harder to determine and track focus fast and accurately. So they slow it down.

But the computers in DSLRs have gotten faster, and I would think the AF sensors have gotten better too. I see no reason why the improved cameras we have today have the same slowdown with TCs they've had since the film era. Perhaps they are running an old algorithm from the 1980s?

Then the question for the new supertelephoto users: is AF speed with the new lenses worse or the same as the old lenses? It would be nice to see some real numbers. Here are some numbers with the version one 300 f/2.8: move focus too the minimum focus point, then focus on a very distant target.

1D Mark IV + 300 f/2.8 (version 1): about 2/3 second

1D Mark IV + 300 f/2.8 (version 1) + 2x TC: 2 to 2.5 seconds, so about 3 times slower than no TC.

Roger

Thanks for the detailed info, explanation, and correction. I was able to follow most of it. I am pretty sure that what you wrote explains why it is important to pre-focus in many situations when using teleconverters.

Arthur Morris said:

Thanks for the detailed info, explanation, and correction. I was able to follow most of it. I am pretty sure that what you wrote explains why it is important to pre-focus in many situations when using teleconverters.

Click to expand...

Hi Artie,

Yes, exactly!

Roger

. Hey Roger, Here's a related question for you: I feel comfortable recommending the 1.4X TC with the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II lens for folks with pro-sumer bodies like the 7D and the 50D but not the 2X TC but have no compunction recommending the 2X for folks with pro bodies like the MIV. Is there any scientifically justifiable reason for that or have I been wrong all along? (It seems likely as the AF motor is strictly lens related and has nothing to do with the camera body...)

Canon stated in earlier White Papers a slow down in AF acquisition of 60% with the 1.4x, and 70% with the 2x. The new lenses and converters still slow down AF acquisition, but perhaps not as much.
I have used 1.4 and 2x converters with my older 300 and 400 f/2.8 lenses for years, both are razor sharp and stellar performers with the converters, as are the new 300/400 f/2.8 II lenses and converters used. Mostly, because the 300/400 f/2.8 lenses have had much higher MTF than the 500/600 lenses from the get go. Converter use has always required you get on the subject at greater distance, thus providing greater time for the AF to acquire and lock focus. And, this remains the same. As Artie mentioned... pre-focus is extremely beneficial (almost a necessity) when using converters. The new IS in these lenses is AMAZING!!!

Canon's advanced IS, AF, and low noise capability will allow us to create images we would never have considered possible in the past.
I am greatly looking forward to embracing the new cameras, lenses, and flash technology.

I can not agree more... the 300 f/2.8 II being lighter and with better IS than its predecessor is a most valuable tool in a bird photographers arsenal.

Best,

Chas

Arthur Morris said:

. Hey Roger, Here's a related question for you: I feel comfortable recommending the 1.4X TC with the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II lens for folks with pro-sumer bodies like the 7D and the 50D but not the 2X TC but have no compunction recommending the 2X for folks with pro bodies like the MIV. Is there any scientifically justifiable reason for that or have I been wrong all along? (It seems likely as the AF motor is strictly lens related and has nothing to do with the camera body...)

Click to expand...

Hi Artie,

Yes there is some scientific justification, though probably a somewhat gray area. For example here are more numbers of AF speed with 2x TC (I posted these a year or so ago on BPN):

Experiment to determine focus acquisition speed: Time to move from minimum focus to infinity and lock on a target at infinity.
Canon 300 mm f/2.8 L IS lens with canon 2x TC.

1D Mark II: 4 to 5 seconds
5D Mark II: 4 to 5 seconds
7D: 4 to 5 seconds
1D Mark IV: 2 to 2.5 seconds.

So AF speed with 2x TC's is not great pre 1DIV (I didn't have a 1DIII to test).

A second factor is that the crop sensors have smaller pixels, so will be affected more by image quality degradation than the larger pixels of a 1DIV or 5DII.

But having said that, a 2x TC, especially on a 300 f/2.8, or other f/2.8 lens, can give more pixels on a subject, so if the AF can lock on, it might still be work the effort.

Roger

Thanks Roger. It seems that my gut feelings are correct. I am left wondering though, since the AF motor is in the lens what in the real world does the camera have to do with the speed of initial focusing acquisition??? In other words, what inside a MIV makes it focus faster than a 7D for example???

Arthur Morris said:

Thanks Roger. It seems that my gut feelings are correct. I am left wondering though, since the AF motor is in the lens what in the real world does the camera have to do with the speed of initial focusing acquisition??? In other words, what inside a MIV makes it focus faster than a 7D for example???

Click to expand...

That is a good question and I do not know the answer. The answer could involve the speed of the computer. If the camera monitors the AF position while the motor cranks, the faster computer and electronics in the 1DIV may make the difference (remember the 1DIV has 2 digic computers).

Roger

Thanks Roger, I will write Rudy Winston at Canon and see what he has to say.

Here's a quote from Canon's Chuck Westfall regarding the new 1.4x and 2x TC's:

"As with previous EF Extenders, usage of Series III EF Extenders lowers AF drive speed to improve AF performance. When Extender EF 1.4X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 50%. When Extender EF 2X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 75%. This may seem like a drawback, but in reality subject tracking performance remains quite high when Series III Extenders are used with IS II lenses. This is due to improvements in AF precision made possible by the new microcomputer in the extenders."

So it appears that the new microcomputers in the Mark III extenders increase precision and not speed.

Arthur Morris said:

Thanks Roger. It seems that my gut feelings are correct. I am left wondering though, since the AF motor is in the lens what in the real world does the camera have to do with the speed of initial focusing acquisition??? In other words, what inside a MIV makes it focus faster than a 7D for example???

Click to expand...

DIGIC is actually not used for AF calculations, the 1D/7D have a dedicated RISC processor in the AF module that runs the AF sub system.

The 1D series high capacity battery pack can provide more current to the servo motor in the lens for faster AF drive speed.

Thanks Arash. That makes sense.

Alan Stankevitz said:

Here's a quote from Canon's Chuck Westfall regarding the new 1.4x and 2x TC's: "As with previous EF Extenders, usage of Series III EF Extenders lowers AF drive speed to improve AF performance. When Extender EF 1.4X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 50%. When Extender EF 2X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 75%. This may seem like a drawback, but in reality subject tracking performance remains quite high when Series III Extenders are used with IS II lenses. This is due to improvements in AF precision made possible by the new microcomputer in the extenders." So it appears that the new microcomputers in the Mark III extenders increase precision and not speed.

Click to expand...

Having used the 1.4X III with the 300 2.8II and a Mark IV I gotta say that I personally cannot see any big differences in AF precision with birds in flight. When I do everything right, get the sensor on the bird early, and keep the sensor on the bird the images are usually very sharp. My biggest problem is doing that with birds flying right at me. I seem to do better in those situations--with the bird flying right at me--with either a 7D or a 5D MII. That's one reason I am looking forward to getting a 5D III.

This has been a really useful thread. As mentioned in an earlier thread I am looking at the new 300/2.8 II instead of the new 500/4 II for a variety of reasons- size and weight, transportability, hand-holdability, flexibility, and cost amongst them.

So here's a direct question- if you did not have a Canon super-tele (but had the version III TCs), and could only own one super-tele, right now, would you pick up the 300/2.8 II or wait a little for the 500/4 II?

Thanks in advance for any insight here.

John Chardine said:

This has been a really useful thread. As mentioned in an earlier thread I am looking at the new 300/2.8 II instead of the new 500/4 II for a variety of reasons- size and weight, transportability, hand-holdability, flexibility, and cost amongst them.

So here's a direct question- if you did not have a Canon super-tele (but had the version III TCs), and could only own one super-tele, right now, would you pick up the 300/2.8 II or wait a little for the 500/4 II?

Thanks in advance for any insight here.

Click to expand...

Hi John,
There are many factors here and each can be a game changer.

Plus side:

The new 500 f/4 is lower weight so closer to existing 300 f/2.8 which is already pretty easy to hand hold.

The new 500 f/4 MTF charts (see Canon's web site) are almost perfect!!!!!

With today's DSLR with smaller pixels, one can get great images of distant subjects with the shorter focal length (except with the 1DX which is not
small pixels, and will not AF at f/8).

Minus side:

As we get older and weight become more of an issue, the new 300 looks better

The MTF chart for the new 300 versus the old 300 aren't very different (as opposed to the 500)

Both lenses are substantially higher in price.

So for the photographer looking for a new purchase, cost may still be a factor, but a 300 f/2.8 coupled with smaller pixels, like 1DIV or 7D or even 5DII or III still provides great detail.

The MTF specs and weight of the new 500 make me want to upgrade (but the price inhibits me). Ignoring price, I would choose the new 500 if it was my only supertele purchase. But from what I see in the MTF specs for the new 300 f/2.8, while a little better than the old 300, I will not upgrade. -- Just my opinion.

Roger