| Introduction | Measurement | Comparisons | Conclusion |
Taking a lens launched in 1999 and testing it against more current models is always going to be an interesting exercise. Fortunately for the EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM, the test data backs up what users have known for years – it really is very good. If you’ve got one and have been considering an upgrade to the Mark II version, you will find improved optical performance, though not by much. The main benefits will be in the reduction in weight (2,550g vs 2,400g) and the improved Image Stabiliser that offers up to four stops rather than two stops. Canon also claim the AF of the Mk II version is improved.
On the other hand, if you’re in the market for a 300mm lens and don’t currently own one, then your main deciding factor will be price. The EF300mm f/4L IS USM may not be quite as good as its more expensive stable-mates, but it still puts in a very respectable performance. Equally, if you can’t stretch to the cost of the latest Mk II 300mm f/2.8L, then picking up a second-hand EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM is going to offer you very similar performance, for quite a lot less money. In fact, if you don’t need the extra IS stops and the 150g weight difference is not an issue, then the older lens is probably the pick of the trio as it blends great performance with a more affordable second-hand price tag.
|
|
Added by Toshik |
January 16
incorrections
There are several incorrections in the review. For example sharpness (P-Mpix) score is confused with overall DXomark Score.
For example: Attached to the APS-C sensored EOS 7D, the EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM once again puts in a strong performance, scoring 16.7P-Mpix, relative to the EOS 7D’s resolution of 18megapixels. Equally, the Pentax lens scores very well, managing 15.0P-Mpix compared to the 16.3megapixels available on the K-5. Overall, this shows the EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM is as good as it’s made out to be, but in this comparison, the Pentax on a K-5 is not that far behind. EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM + 7D =11P-Mpix not 16.7P-Mpix as mentioned. DA Star 300mm f/4 ED (IF) SDM + Pentax K-5=only 7P-Mpix not 15. Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by Nicolas |
January 18
Re: incorrections
Hello,
There was indeed a mistake. This part was only talking about DxOMark score. Thanks a lot for letting us know, it should now be corrected. Best regards, Reply |
|
|
Added by Toshik |
January 19
Re: incorrections
Furthermore in the [url=http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/With-new-STM-technology-does-Canon-s-updated-18-135mm-still-deliver/Comparisons]review[/url] of Canon EF-S 18-135mm f3.5-f5.6 IS STM lens
In comparison section: Quote: Tested on the flagship APS-C DSLRs from Canon and Nikon, the 7D and D7000, these two Super Zooms achieve remarkably similar results. Overall we can say they’re the same optically although the Nikon version hits a DxOMark Score of 13 just nudging out the Canon with 12. The screenshot shows us not D7000 but D300 with the score 10 not 13 as mentioned. [img]http://www.dxomark.com/itext/review/lens/canon-18-135mm/12.jpg[/img] Reply |
|
|
Added by Toshik |
February 15
Re: incorrections
Error in screenshot
What does it mean "Not available"? [img]http://cdn.dxomark.com/itext/review/camera/nikkon-1-j3/06.jpg[/img] Reply |
To provide photographers with a broader perspective about mobiles, lenses and cameras, here are links to articles, reviews, and analyses of photographic equipment produced by DxOMark, renown websites, magazines or blogs.