Quote:
Originally Posted by lowside67
The 300 2.8 II may be the sharpest lens Canon has ever built. It truly is the benchmark that all my other "sharp" lens are measured against - 85 1.8, 70-200 2.8 II, etc. The bokeh is also truly special, it's simply smooth in a way that zooms never seem to accomplish.
....
All of these options are a bunch of money and large and imposing. The idea of taking the absolute top of class autofocus performance that the superteles bring to the table and throw it away by using it via an adapter on a non Canon body seems somewhat a waste to me. I am not taking away from what nice images some of the other bodies can produce, but autofocus is absolutely the name of the game for birds in flight, and anything that compromises would not be worth it for an increase in dynamic range, etc.
In my humble opinion, if you are going to spend the money on a super tele, you should try it with a top quality Canon body paired to it. A truly incredible combo.
Mark
|
Hey Mark,
I agree with almost everything that you say, but the EF 300/f4 also has stunning IQ. Look at the comparison link. Bokeh with the Canon super-teles at 300mm is stunning at every f-stop, IME.
I think our OP is at entry level. That's part of the reason that I suggested the 300/f4 used. He can get in at low cost and see how much he's shooting. If he finds himself shooting 10,000 image per month, like me and probably you, then he'll want to move up to the 400/f4 DO or 500/f4 S-II, etc.
Another lens to consider is the 100-400/f4.5-5.6 II. On the bodies, from the 7D2, up to the 1DX MkII, the AF is excellent, even with the EF 1.4x TC-III attached. With Sony, all bets are off, but he can investigate that at a good store.
Dave