Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Canon 300 f/4 L IS with 2x converter test

Reply
Thread Tools

Canon 300 f/4 L IS with 2x converter test

 
 
JohnR66
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-09-2005
http://home.att.net/~jriegle/300f4L2x.jpg

This is a test shot using the Canon 300mm f/4 L IS lens with the Canon 2x
teleconverter. The shot was made on the 6mp digital Rebel with all
parameters set to 0 and ISO 200. The image is a full resolution center crop.
I applied some unsharp mask (crop and unsharp mask is all the editing
performed). The shot was made with the lens wide open.

As you can see, there is some expected loss in image quality. Sharpness
stays nearly even across the frame but there is mild to moderate color
fringing at the edges. The new Canon 2x II converter is said to handle the
color fringing better (this is the old one). Stopping down cleaned up the
image.

With the 2x on the 300mm and the 1.6x cropping factor of the Rebel, field of
view is about the same as a 1000mm lens on a 35mm camera.

John


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
eawckyegcy@yahoo.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-09-2005
JohnR66 wrote:

> As you can see, there is some expected loss in image quality.


You need two points to draw a line.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
SimonLW
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-10-2005
Use a smaller radius when sharpening. It looks too much like video to me.
-S

"JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bH3qe.923896$(E-Mail Removed)...
> http://home.att.net/~jriegle/300f4L2x.jpg
>
> This is a test shot using the Canon 300mm f/4 L IS lens with the Canon 2x
> teleconverter. The shot was made on the 6mp digital Rebel with all
> parameters set to 0 and ISO 200. The image is a full resolution center

crop.
> I applied some unsharp mask (crop and unsharp mask is all the editing
> performed). The shot was made with the lens wide open.
>
> As you can see, there is some expected loss in image quality. Sharpness
> stays nearly even across the frame but there is mild to moderate color
> fringing at the edges. The new Canon 2x II converter is said to handle the
> color fringing better (this is the old one). Stopping down cleaned up the
> image.
>
> With the 2x on the 300mm and the 1.6x cropping factor of the Rebel, field

of
> view is about the same as a 1000mm lens on a 35mm camera.
>
> John
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
dylan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-10-2005

"JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bH3qe.923896$(E-Mail Removed)...
> http://home.att.net/~jriegle/300f4L2x.jpg
>
> This is a test shot using the Canon 300mm f/4 L IS lens with the Canon 2x
> teleconverter. The shot was made on the 6mp digital Rebel with all
> parameters set to 0 and ISO 200. The image is a full resolution center
> crop. I applied some unsharp mask (crop and unsharp mask is all the
> editing performed). The shot was made with the lens wide open.
>
> As you can see, there is some expected loss in image quality. Sharpness
> stays nearly even across the frame but there is mild to moderate color
> fringing at the edges. The new Canon 2x II converter is said to handle the
> color fringing better (this is the old one). Stopping down cleaned up the
> image.
>
> With the 2x on the 300mm and the 1.6x cropping factor of the Rebel, field
> of view is about the same as a 1000mm lens on a 35mm camera.
>
> John
>
>


Is your wall built from polystyrene or soap ;O)
Compared to what I would expect it doesn't look a good photo, over
compressed ?

some photos taken with a 400 5.6 L www.knighttrain.freeserve.co.uk/400.htm
and 1.4x for comparison.


 
Reply With Quote
 
JPS@no.komm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-11-2005
In message <bH3qe.923896$(E-Mail Removed)>,
"JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>http://home.att.net/~jriegle/300f4L2x.jpg
>
>This is a test shot using the Canon 300mm f/4 L IS lens with the Canon 2x
>teleconverter.


That's pretty soft for that combo. I've had better results with mine
with a 2x and 1.4x *stacked*.

What was your shutter speed? I wouldn't use anything less than about
1/1000 without the IS, or 1/400 with IS.

Was the lens wide open?
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 
Reply With Quote
 
dylan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-11-2005

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In message <bH3qe.923896$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> "JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>http://home.att.net/~jriegle/300f4L2x.jpg
>>
>>This is a test shot using the Canon 300mm f/4 L IS lens with the Canon 2x
>>teleconverter.

>
> That's pretty soft for that combo. I've had better results with mine
> with a 2x and 1.4x *stacked*.
>
> What was your shutter speed? I wouldn't use anything less than about
> 1/1000 without the IS, or 1/400 with IS.
>
> Was the lens wide open?


Totally agree about the quality, 1/1000 seems a bit excessive but probably
varies between users.
Regards fully open, look at the examples I linked to in my earlier reply
they are all fully open, I would expect better than they got even with fully
open, unless the 300 f4 isn't that good ?

Cheers


 
Reply With Quote
 
JohnR66
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-11-2005

"dylan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:d8c9jg$sdk$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:bH3qe.923896$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> http://home.att.net/~jriegle/300f4L2x.jpg
>>
>> This is a test shot using the Canon 300mm f/4 L IS lens with the Canon 2x
>> teleconverter. The shot was made on the 6mp digital Rebel with all
>> parameters set to 0 and ISO 200. The image is a full resolution center
>> crop. I applied some unsharp mask (crop and unsharp mask is all the
>> editing performed). The shot was made with the lens wide open.
>>
>> As you can see, there is some expected loss in image quality. Sharpness
>> stays nearly even across the frame but there is mild to moderate color
>> fringing at the edges. The new Canon 2x II converter is said to handle
>> the color fringing better (this is the old one). Stopping down cleaned up
>> the image.
>>
>> With the 2x on the 300mm and the 1.6x cropping factor of the Rebel, field
>> of view is about the same as a 1000mm lens on a 35mm camera.
>>
>> John
>>
>>

>
> Is your wall built from polystyrene or soap ;O)
> Compared to what I would expect it doesn't look a good photo, over
> compressed ?
>
> some photos taken with a 400 5.6 L www.knighttrain.freeserve.co.uk/400.htm
> and 1.4x for comparison.
>
>

The 1.4x shot looks soft to me. Showing close ups of common everyday items,
like the leaves, can give a false sense of sharpness. If you concentrate on
the edges, the image is rather soft. Teleconverters, especially the 2x is
always a compromise.

I'm no wiz a sharpening. Someone told me I had probably had the radius set
to high in the unsharp mask causing a video like appearance. I'll have to
play with the lens and 2x combo to see if I can do better.
John



 
Reply With Quote
 
JohnR66
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-11-2005

"dylan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:d8e80o$kb8$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> In message <bH3qe.923896$(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> "JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>http://home.att.net/~jriegle/300f4L2x.jpg
>>>
>>>This is a test shot using the Canon 300mm f/4 L IS lens with the Canon 2x
>>>teleconverter.

>>
>> That's pretty soft for that combo. I've had better results with mine
>> with a 2x and 1.4x *stacked*.
>>
>> What was your shutter speed? I wouldn't use anything less than about
>> 1/1000 without the IS, or 1/400 with IS.
>>
>> Was the lens wide open?

>
> Totally agree about the quality, 1/1000 seems a bit excessive but probably
> varies between users.
> Regards fully open, look at the examples I linked to in my earlier reply
> they are all fully open, I would expect better than they got even with
> fully open, unless the 300 f4 isn't that good ?
>
> Cheers
>
>

Yes, the lens was wide open. I think I was around 1/500 with IS on. It seems
there is a bit vertical smear in the shat from shutter bounce or mirro slap.
It seems IS is not as good for helping sharp movements as these, but is
great for the slower movements from hand holding.
John


 
Reply With Quote
 
Celcius
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-11-2005
Hi John!

Sorry I'm not on subject here, but I was wondering about the benefit of
using the 1.4 extender with the lens 17-85mm IS, USM. I was thinking it
might boost the lens from 130mm to 180mm. With this lens, I have some zoom
capability 28-130mm, and with the extender, I don't have a big lense, yet it
reaches 180mm. Am I way out to lunch?

Thanks,

Marcel



"JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:vtBqe.933739$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "dylan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:d8c9jg$sdk$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> > "JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:bH3qe.923896$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> http://home.att.net/~jriegle/300f4L2x.jpg
> >>
> >> This is a test shot using the Canon 300mm f/4 L IS lens with the Canon

2x
> >> teleconverter. The shot was made on the 6mp digital Rebel with all
> >> parameters set to 0 and ISO 200. The image is a full resolution center
> >> crop. I applied some unsharp mask (crop and unsharp mask is all the
> >> editing performed). The shot was made with the lens wide open.
> >>
> >> As you can see, there is some expected loss in image quality. Sharpness
> >> stays nearly even across the frame but there is mild to moderate color
> >> fringing at the edges. The new Canon 2x II converter is said to handle
> >> the color fringing better (this is the old one). Stopping down cleaned

up
> >> the image.
> >>
> >> With the 2x on the 300mm and the 1.6x cropping factor of the Rebel,

field
> >> of view is about the same as a 1000mm lens on a 35mm camera.
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >>

> >
> > Is your wall built from polystyrene or soap ;O)
> > Compared to what I would expect it doesn't look a good photo, over
> > compressed ?
> >
> > some photos taken with a 400 5.6 L

www.knighttrain.freeserve.co.uk/400.htm
> > and 1.4x for comparison.
> >
> >

> The 1.4x shot looks soft to me. Showing close ups of common everyday

items,
> like the leaves, can give a false sense of sharpness. If you concentrate

on
> the edges, the image is rather soft. Teleconverters, especially the 2x is
> always a compromise.
>
> I'm no wiz a sharpening. Someone told me I had probably had the radius set
> to high in the unsharp mask causing a video like appearance. I'll have to
> play with the lens and 2x combo to see if I can do better.
> John
>
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-11-2005
dylan wrote:

> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>In message <bH3qe.923896$(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>"JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>http://home.att.net/~jriegle/300f4L2x.jpg
>>>
>>>This is a test shot using the Canon 300mm f/4 L IS lens with the Canon 2x
>>>teleconverter.

>>
>>That's pretty soft for that combo. I've had better results with mine
>>with a 2x and 1.4x *stacked*.
>>
>>What was your shutter speed? I wouldn't use anything less than about
>>1/1000 without the IS, or 1/400 with IS.
>>
>>Was the lens wide open?

>
>
> Totally agree about the quality, 1/1000 seems a bit excessive but probably
> varies between users.
> Regards fully open, look at the examples I linked to in my earlier reply
> they are all fully open, I would expect better than they got even with fully
> open, unless the 300 f4 isn't that good ?
>
> Cheers
>
>

Yes, the 300mm f/4 L IS is good (at least my lens is). Here is a
recent 300mm f/4 + 1.4x TC with some full size crops:

http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...962.b-700.html

While this image was done on a tripod, the head was loose so I could follow
the birds. IS was on.

I have 300 f/4 + 2x TC images that are equally sharp.

While I have quite steady hands, I find that at 300 mm and higher, I
get a low percentage of sharp images even with IS. Perhaps that is due
to my use of the telephotos for following animals in action, and I'm
rapidly moving. With a head (Wimberly, full or sidekick) I find
my movements are smoother and the IS works well, giving me
very sharp images.

There are Canon lenses that may not achieve good focus. For example,
I have a 100-400 L IS zoom and it is soft at 400mm though others
have units that are very sharp. I need to send mine back to
Canon for recalibration.

Roger
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Moyea Video Converter with iPad video converter brntkobe1 Computer Support 0 04-18-2010 08:22 AM
canon 70-300 v. tamron 28-300 pshaw@emmet.com Digital Photography 11 12-24-2004 07:04 PM
300D + Sigma 70-300 or Canon 100-300? Marcel Alsemgeest Digital Photography 19 09-05-2004 01:28 AM
Canon 90-300 or Sigma 70-300 ? PeterH Digital Photography 8 02-11-2004 05:29 PM
test test test test test test test Computer Support 2 07-02-2003 06:02 PM



Advertisments