100-300mm and 200-500mm
May 21, 2023 15:56:47 #
With the 100-300mm f2.8 and 200-500mm f4 why would a fixed 300mm f2.8 or a 500mm f4 be needed?
If I were doing sports or wildlife where the 300mm and 500mm are popular these have the same speed as the fixed lenses with additional versatility not found in the fixed lenses.
Also with as rumored TCs matched to them even more versatility is available.
If I were doing sports or wildlife where the 300mm and 500mm are popular these have the same speed as the fixed lenses with additional versatility not found in the fixed lenses.
Also with as rumored TCs matched to them even more versatility is available.
May 21, 2023 16:15:13 #
Architect1776 wrote:
With the 100-300mm f2.8 and 200-500mm f4 why would a fixed 300mm f2.8 or a 500mm f4 be needed?
If I were doing sports or wildlife where the 300mm and 500mm are popular these have the same speed as the fixed lenses with additional versatility not found in the fixed lenses.
Also with as rumored TCs matched to them even more versatility is available.
If I were doing sports or wildlife where the 300mm and 500mm are popular these have the same speed as the fixed lenses with additional versatility not found in the fixed lenses.
Also with as rumored TCs matched to them even more versatility is available.
I have an 18-200 that lives on my camera.
I value the versatility over any "added crispness" from a fixed focal length lens.
May 21, 2023 16:41:14 #
Longshadow wrote:
I have an 18-200 that lives on my camera.
I value the versatility over any "added crispness" from a fixed focal length lens.
I have an 18-200 that lives on my camera.
I value the versatility over any "added crispness" from a fixed focal length lens.
I would dare say that at the rumored prices that no fixed lens would be crisper or sharper.
May 21, 2023 17:00:24 #
Architect1776 wrote:
With the 100-300mm f2.8 and 200-500mm f4 why would a fixed 300mm f2.8 or a 500mm f4 be needed?
If I were doing sports or wildlife where the 300mm and 500mm are popular these have the same speed as the fixed lenses with additional versatility not found in the fixed lenses.
Also with as rumored TCs matched to them even more versatility is available.
If I were doing sports or wildlife where the 300mm and 500mm are popular these have the same speed as the fixed lenses with additional versatility not found in the fixed lenses.
Also with as rumored TCs matched to them even more versatility is available.
Well, since only the RF 100-300 is currently able to be ordered (at $9500), it’s hard to make comparisons, but it’s highly likely the primes will smaller, lighter and possibly less expensive IF they are available. Whether they’re sharper remains to be seen. My guess is that Canon is responding to the marketplace, where zooms are generally more popular than primes.
May 21, 2023 17:08:50 #
Architect1776 wrote:
I would dare say that at the rumored prices that no fixed lens would be crisper or sharper.
May 21, 2023 17:19:01 #
TriX wrote:
Well, since only the RF 100-300 is currently able to be ordered (at $9500), it’s hard to make comparisons, but it’s highly likely the primes will smaller, lighter and possibly less expensive IF they are available. Whether they’re sharper remains to be seen. My guess is that Canon is responding to the marketplace, where zooms are generally more popular than primes.
And far more versatile.
If you had a 300mm f2.8 at a game or the zoom you would always pick the zoom.
Same speed and the ability to recompose instantly vs a fixed lens.
Same for the 200-500mm f4.
Sharpness if like the 100-500mm or 100-400mm MII is indistinguishable from any fixed lens.
May 21, 2023 17:20:56 #
Architect1776 wrote:
With the 100-300mm f2.8 and 200-500mm f4 why would a fixed 300mm f2.8 or a 500mm f4 be needed?
If I were doing sports or wildlife where the 300mm and 500mm are popular these have the same speed as the fixed lenses with additional versatility not found in the fixed lenses.
Also with as rumored TCs matched to them even more versatility is available.
If I were doing sports or wildlife where the 300mm and 500mm are popular these have the same speed as the fixed lenses with additional versatility not found in the fixed lenses.
Also with as rumored TCs matched to them even more versatility is available.
I agree. I have a 120-300mm f2.8 and a 300-800mm f5 6 constant aperture. The 120-300 take a 1.4 TC well. I have all my wildlife distances covered with 2 lenses and I'm a pixel peeper. I will say the 300-800 is very sharp. And after getting the 120-300 back from service because it was front focusing terribly bad it's awesome also. A prime might be SLIGHTLY sharper but not enough for even me to care.
May 21, 2023 18:08:46 #
Drbobcameraguy wrote:
I agree. I have a 120-300mm f2.8 and a 300-800mm f5 6 constant aperture. The 120-300 take a 1.4 TC well. I have all my wildlife distances covered with 2 lenses and I'm a pixel peeper. I will say the 300-800 is very sharp. And after getting the 120-300 back from service because it was front focusing terribly bad it's awesome also. A prime might be SLIGHTLY sharper but not enough for even me to care.
I agree and glad you love the quality of the fine zooms that you have.
All are out of my justification to get but will be hot sellers,in fact the 100-300mm is already overwhelmed.
May 22, 2023 07:15:02 #
Architect1776 wrote:
And far more versatile.
If you had a 300mm f2.8 at a game or the zoom you would always pick the zoom.
Same speed and the ability to recompose instantly vs a fixed lens.
Same for the 200-500mm f4.
Sharpness if like the 100-500mm or 100-400mm MII is indistinguishable from any fixed lens.
If you had a 300mm f2.8 at a game or the zoom you would always pick the zoom.
Same speed and the ability to recompose instantly vs a fixed lens.
Same for the 200-500mm f4.
Sharpness if like the 100-500mm or 100-400mm MII is indistinguishable from any fixed lens.
Well, there is a difference in IQ, I own both the 300 f/2.8 II and the 100-400 II, and there is definitely a difference, even with extenders the 300 is sharper.
I will also add that using Topaz software you can make just about any lens sharp.
May 22, 2023 07:24:02 #
Architect1776 wrote:
With the 100-300mm f2.8 and 200-500mm f4 why would a fixed 300mm f2.8 or a 500mm f4 be needed?
If I were doing sports or wildlife where the 300mm and 500mm are popular these have the same speed as the fixed lenses with additional versatility not found in the fixed lenses.
Also with as rumored TCs matched to them even more versatility is available.
If I were doing sports or wildlife where the 300mm and 500mm are popular these have the same speed as the fixed lenses with additional versatility not found in the fixed lenses.
Also with as rumored TCs matched to them even more versatility is available.
Weight may be a factor. Two lenses I own, Nikkor 200- 500mm F/5.6 and 500mm F/5.6 pf, are night and day when it comes to weight.
---
May 22, 2023 07:26:45 #
Bill_de wrote:
Weight may be a factor. Two lenses I own, Nikkor 200- 500mm F/5.6 and 500mm F/5.6 pf, are night and day when it comes to weight.
---
---
Your 500mm is much slower thus lighter.
Wrong comparison.
May 22, 2023 07:29:45 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
Well, there is a difference in IQ, I own both the 300 f/2.8 II and the 100-400 II, and there is definitely a difference, even with extenders the 300 is sharper.
I will also add that using Topaz software you can make just about any lens sharp.
I will also add that using Topaz software you can make just about any lens sharp.
Yes a possible difference for peepers as I said.
But in real world use by the pros these are intended for it is imperceptible. Especially when getting the shot is critical vs changing lenses and losing the shot.
May 22, 2023 07:30:47 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Your 500mm is much slower thus lighter.
Wrong comparison.
Wrong comparison.
Not sure what you mean by slower. They are both F/5.6.
---
May 22, 2023 08:17:22 #
Bill_de wrote:
Not sure what you mean by slower. They are both F/5.6.
---
---
Not.
F4 for 200-500mm.
Nikon is the slower f5.6
Read the original post.
May 22, 2023 08:52:40 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Not.
F4 for 200-500mm.
Nikon is the slower f5.6
Read the original post.
F4 for 200-500mm.
Nikon is the slower f5.6
Read the original post.
I was just comparing weight of 2 lenses that I own.
----
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.