Prime vs Telephoto Lenses - Which should you get? What are the Pros and Cons?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 ก.ย. 2024
- Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @joewhitnallphotography
Instagram - / joe_whitnall_photography
Facebook - / joewhitnallphotography
Website - joewhitnallpho...
My first professional lens was the Canon EF 100-400 Mk1 which was a vast improved to anything i had used before; had to sell it. I was able to obtain the 100-400 Mk2 which i still have and it was an incredible improvement over Mk1. Later on, I learned more about lenses including prime lenses. My first professional prime lens was the Canon EF 300 f/2.8 mk1 and it was another eye opener in regards to image quality...wow. Sadly I could not afford a 500 f/4 nor 600 f/4 or 800 f5/.6 and so I purchased a used Canon EF 400 f/4 DO IS Mk2 for a good deal as well as the light weight. It works well with mirrorless cameras and has also great image quality but can only use the 1.4x Mk3 extender unlike the EF 300 f/2.8 that can also use the 2x Mk3 extender. I use both Primes and zoom lenses depending on the circumstances, like hiking which benefits from lighter weight and flexible Zoom or low light which is best for primes with low f-stop. With the new mirror less cameras (R5, R6, R6 Mk2, R7 etc)either one works well. Investing in good glass makes a difference, zoom or prime
Hi there, have you ever compared the EF 300mm f/2.8 with a 2.0x teleconverter to the Canon RF 100-500mm? I'm considering getting the 300mm f/2.8 prime lens, but I'm concerned it might not be sharp enough.
I have the 100-500 on my want list for review, Some people seem to love it and some hate it!
The Rf 100-500 is very sharp like the EF 100-400mk2 and fast in AF but has an additional 100mm and a little bit lighter (due to industrial plastic use instead of Aluminum). It is very fast in AF with the new mirrorless cameras and a delight to use. I recommend to buy that RF 100-500 if you do not have a great zoom lens (like EF 100-400Mk2). Now in regards to sharpness and the extra 2/3 stops (2.8x2 vs 7.1) of light, the EF 300 f/28 IS mk1 is superbly sharp even with the EF 2x Mk3 but weighs more than the RF100-500 and you have to use your feet to zoom ;-) I still use the 3002.8 with the 2x extender and get incredible pictures (Osprey , Eagles, Herons etc) but is heavy to hold for long times. The RF 100-500 is an excellent alternative in my humble opinion. I use the RF zoom with RF 1.4x and occasionally RF 2x (2x is better when used on super sharp super-telephoto lenses like RF 600 f/4 etc); the 1.4x extender is good to use on the RF zoom lens. I hope this helps a bit.
@@nobodynoone5795 Thank you for your response. Considering I have the budget for only one lens, which would you recommend? My top priority for bird photography is sharpness and detail. I'm still unsure which option offers better sharpness-the RF 100-500mm or the 300mm with a 2.0x teleconverter-as I'm quite particular about pixel-level clarity. I'd appreciate your insights. Thanks!
That cheetah looked like it wanted to take you out. Nice images.
Haha can't blame it!
Hello everybody,
I bought about a year ago my dream lens, a used Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS (non Sport), after selling my beloved Canon 100-400mm Mk II. My first "big" lens is my Tamron 150-600mm G1, which I still have today.
Greetings from Germany.
Not used the 120-300, Is it alot better than the 100-400 in your option?
@joewhitnallphotography Hm, I think it is more of a sidestep. Stopped down to the f-stops of the Canon, the Sigma is in my opinion equaly sharp. The Canon is better in AF, size, weight, stabilization and has more reach. The Sigma is a lot heavier (1.5 to 3kg), but catches a lot more light and the bokeh is at f/2.8 a lot more pleasing. I like the look of the pictures, you can still shoot at almost night. It is also a zoom-lens with 300mm at f/2.8 for a very good price, too. A 150-600mm lens should be the better comparison to the Canon 100-400mm.
Enjoyed the video Joe! A well thought through consideration of perks of both a zoom and a prime
I like primes for those reasons you talk about, you learn to move about a lot and kinda get a good grasp over what you can photo and what you can’t like you I take two lenses usually, but I normally go my 400mmf/5.6 with either a 24mm TS-E for buildings, a 50mm sigma ART for general, or 85mm f/1.2 if taking people pics. A good combo I always find :0) do you go that wide with any lenses?
Nothing really that wide, I use a 17-40 on the R10 for filming and i did use a 50mm Sigma Art for a wedding I did but most the things I use the camera for I have the need for those longer lenses!
Hi Joe,
Thanks for the video-very informative! I currently use a Canon R7 with the RF 100-500mm lens. I've always wanted a 300mm f/2.8 lens, but I can only afford one lens at the moment. Have you done a comparison between the RF 100-500mm and the EF 300mm f/2.8 with a 2.0x TC in terms of image quality? I'm uncertain which would be better, especially since there aren't many reviews covering video performance for the Canon 300mm f/2.8.
I love my Canon R7, and the image quality with the RF 100-500mm is superbly sharp. However, in very low light conditions-like early morning birding in the forest-it does show some limitations. I hope you can consider making a comparison video in the future, or at least share your thoughts on the sharpness of the EF 300mm f/2.8 with a 2.0x TC.
Thanks!
Hey! Just replied to your other comment,
BUT
I do already have a video on the 300mm with the 2.0x TC!!
th-cam.com/video/G6l_UZ5PLRE/w-d-xo.html
Hope you enjoy it!
@@joewhitnallphotography thanks Joe for the info
Hello Joe.
Would you say the EF 400mm f/4 DO version 1 is a good choice for prime lens in 2024?
Not used one yet, But I would go with the mki 300mm f2.8 and use convertors if you need extra reach!