Ive got Nikon gear and Ive got access to the 300mm 2.8 and the 500mm 4. The 300mm 2X is solid but it is not as good as the 500mm with the 1.4 or 1.7 TC. If your doing bird photography Id go with the 500mm. Just my 2 cents.
I have and use both. I cannot tell a bit of difference between sharpness of the 500 vs the 300. Both prime lenses are excellent.
Rich Ditch uses the 300 + TC 2.0 and his images are always tack-sharp.
The 300 F2.8 will happily handle a TC 2.0x, while the 500 will take only a TC 1.4x or -sometimes - the 1.7x.
If you use a cropped sensor, consider the end result, if you need reach - and I'm assuming you do, since you posted in the BIRD forum.
300mm x 1.5 x 1.4 = 900mm
500mm x 1.5 x 1.4 = 1050
500mm x 1.5 x 1.7 = 1275 (if you could use a 1.7 - needs very good light)
Sandy
Posted by Bill Reichert on March 18, 2012 at 10:17 PM
It seems that the 300 w a 2xTC would be a lot more versatile due to carrying less weight. Sometimes I walk several miles in the hills and mountains out west to get shots of longspurs, rosy finches, etc. or swamp edges for prothonotary, Kentucky warblers, etc. or boreal forests for owls, woodpeckers, etc as well as many other species in remote areas well off the grid.
Carrying a heavy tripod, ballhead, lens and TC across rough ground for several miles is a very taxing and delicate process. It might be better to have a more versatile unit that allows easier access to the photo ops. That would be better than photos missed.
Anyone using a 300mm plus 2xTC? Are you satisfied?
Bill Reichert
I was wondering if the picture quality would suffer using a 1D Mk3?
Discussion
3 repliesHow would the picture quality compare?
Thanks in advance.
Bill Reichert
Rich Ditch uses the 300 + TC 2.0 and his images are always tack-sharp.
The 300 F2.8 will happily handle a TC 2.0x, while the 500 will take only a TC 1.4x or -sometimes - the 1.7x.
If you use a cropped sensor, consider the end result, if you need reach - and I'm assuming you do, since you posted in the BIRD forum.
300mm x 1.5 x 1.4 = 900mm
500mm x 1.5 x 1.4 = 1050
500mm x 1.5 x 1.7 = 1275 (if you could use a 1.7 - needs very good light)
Sandy
Carrying a heavy tripod, ballhead, lens and TC across rough ground for several miles is a very taxing and delicate process. It might be better to have a more versatile unit that allows easier access to the photo ops. That would be better than photos missed.
Anyone using a 300mm plus 2xTC? Are you satisfied?
Bill Reichert
I was wondering if the picture quality would suffer using a 1D Mk3?