Jump to content

New life of Canon EF 300mm f/4 L


Langstrum
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm the owner of some good Canon and legacy manual lenses, so my main purpose of using Sony A7ii is for adapting those lenses, especially the telephoto ones. With the IBIS, the telephoto lenses really shine and I don't have to replace them with much more expensve IS versions. In the case the EF 300mm f/4 L, the IS version is even not as sharp.

I really love this lens, it's among the best lenses Canon ever made (beside the EF 200mm f/1.8 L that I also have), and while it's a 300mm lens, I still can manage to carry it for walking around (which I can't with the f/2.8 version). I use the Viltrox adapter and the autofocus sucks, but I don't need anyway since taking photos from distance allowed me to manually focus more slowly and carefully. Once the focus point is reached, it's really sharp, and very little CA was shown even at the most contrast part of the image. All the photos here I shot during my visit to Philadelphia and Washington. They were shot handholding at wide open all the time, and of course, with the help of IBIS. If you want to see better resolution, click to each photo to go to its Flick link. 

Thank you Sony, that's the whole new life for my lenses.

20995765608_14a2f5af14_b.jpg

 

20995556550_ea2f4f1552_b.jpg

 

20994459190_b494f2c9a5_b.jpg

21172297272_507a02a94b_b.jpg

 

21157436136_18fee7c12a_b.jpg

21191522981_4f080fc61f_b.jpg

21173386812_aba2c11ee4_b.jpg

21191523701_3c4057852b_b.jpg

21157435306_a37da74bf6_b.jpg

21191521051_76046d096b_b.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi have you noticed any improvements in af with the lastest firmware updates?

Yes, big improvement, now A7ii can work with most of my adapters, even the cheap ones. However some old lenses are still not fast and the accuracy is adapter-dependent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Posts

    • Hello ! A friend gave me an old Sony SLT A65 that was locked in a suitcase for some years and guess what... It was pretty dirty. The translucent mirror looks strange. I know it's a pellicle mirror, but something is really weird , at least to me who never saw this entity before. It shows a rainbow pattern when lit, like a diffraction grid. And when I point the camera to a strong light source, let´s say streets lights or car lights, a huge halo and a diffuse pattern appears, almost like one of that photographic filters from the '70s. I guess the mirror is damaged. Does enyone have any experience with this ? I managed to remove the mirror and carefully rinse it with water and detergent solution , rinse again and dry, but the rainbow patter persists. My question is basically about the translucent mirror behavior with strong highlights and if the rainbow pattern on its surface is normal.   Thanks!  
    • Sounds like you need a manual, and you are correct different settings can affect what you can do in the drive more.  Did you simple press the DRIVE button and select the THREE rectangles? There are several "burst" modes -- that you set with the Fn button or DRIVE button.  One takes several photos, when you press the button once (CONTINUOUS).  Another requires you to press the shutter button each time (SINGLE).  When you press the DRIVE button, what icon shows up -- a single rectangle or three?
    • If the 18-105 is too bulky, then so is the Tamron 17-70. Quality wise however, definately pick the Tamron over the Sony Zeiss 16-70, which is a compromised and dated design and similar in quality to the 18-105. I was in the same boat as you for a while (also had the 16-50 kit lens and 18-105 f/4), and went with the Sony 16-55 F/2.8 G. Happy with the choice as it's more compact than the Tamron 17-70 and vastly better quality than the Zony 16-70. In your case however, the omission of stabilized optics might be a dealbreaker. Did you consider the tiny but decent Sigma 18-50 f/2.8?
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...