Originally posted by coolhar:
I have the older non-IS version of the 300mm f4 L. It's a great lens, some say it's one of Canon's best ever designs. But I would never think of it as really appropriate for macro work. I thought that the term macro, when used to describe a lens, meant the lens was capable of focusing on objects close to the camera, in the range of about one foot down to less than an inch. With a minimin focus distance of 4.9 feet for the current IS model, and closer to 6 feet for my old one, the 300mm f4 L wouldn't be my first choice when reccommending a lens for macro work. |
the closest focus on your lens is actually 2.5 meters or 8.2 feet. This gives almost twice as much magnification for the IS version. If you throw in a filter, or extention tubes like I mentioned when suggesting the lens, you can get pretty darn good magnification, with far better working distance and backround blur than your average macro lens, while giving up complete 1:1 focusing.
|
