I've been pondering acquiring the Canon 300 F4L IS as my next lens purchase for a little while now, as my 70-200 is a bit too short in some cases, and performs very inconsistently with the 1.4 extender.
So yesterday, I found myself right by the local camera shop, so figured I would see what lenses they had for rent. Never mind the fact that I drive by said camera shop every day.
Anyway, they only rent lenses if they have used copies, and they happened to have a used copy of the 300 F4L non-IS. So, what the hell, I'm used to shooting without IS anyway.
Took it up to Imperial Hill about an hour before sunset. First impressions:
1.) I am NOT used to following objects at 300mm.
2.) Have to pay attention and plan framing in advance (which is not a bad thing), since you can't zoom in/zoom out. This is especially important, because....
3.) The focus ring is located where the zoom ring typically is. So if, by complete habit, I try and zoom, then I screw up the focus. Dammit.
4.) I was surprised how small and light it is. About the same as my 70-200.
5.) Built-in lens hood is pretty cool.
Now for zee images:




I was really helped out by relatively heat-haze-free conditions. Image impressions (after viewing the images on my computer):
1.) Focusing accuracy was not the best. I'd say worse than my 70-200.
3/52.) Focusing speed was also not the best.
3/55.) When focusing, my panning, and conditions were all on, the lens was quite sharp. Maybe slightly sharper than the 70-200, but nothing hugely noticeable. Didn't notice any soft spots, even near the edges.
5/53.) Color/contrast seemed fine. No complaints.
4/54.) I shot at apertures between F4 and F7.1. Lens was plenty sharp at all apertures.
5/5Averaging my scores, it gets a
4/5. Given the relatively small price difference, I'd still opt for the IS version, methinks.
Hopefully I'll be able to try it again today or tomorrow, a little earlier so the light is better. It's also worth noting that on a lot of days, the shots I posted would be heat-hazed to all hell.