The Canon RF 100-300mm f/2.8 L IS USM and Sony FE 300mm f/2.8 GM OSS are two of the most extreme new lenses on the market right now, meant to help professional sports, wildlife, and bird photographers capture stunning images no matter how demanding the conditions. How do these two top-shelf options compare? This excellent video comparison puts them both to the test.
Coming to you from Jared Polin, this great video review compares the Canon RF 100-300mm f/2.8 L IS USM and Sony FE 300mm f/2.8 GM OSS lenses. Of course, the major advantage of Canon's lens is that zoom range, particularly in a focal length range traditionally dominated by prime lenses if one wants an f/2.8 aperture. But with that extra versatility comes a much higher price than Sony's offering and almost double the weight, meaning you will need to think carefully about both your bank account and your back before picking one up. And the Sony is no slouch either, offering stunning image quality and autofocus performance in a ridiculously small package for a 300mm f/2.8 lens. It sure seems like both lenses are world-class performers; it really comes down to the balance of price, weight, and versatility that is best for you. Check out the video above for Polin's full thoughts.
Jared's right.
The Sony 300mm is so last century.
If I can get a 300mm f2.8 with 100-299mm f2.8 thrown in it is a no brainer.
I did some research on these two lenses and concluded that I would be best off with a Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II lens if I needed a zoom range, given that the 300mm costs more than twice as much and my FF equipment is Sony. That's the interesting thing about physical hardware, especially lenses. There is no linear relationship between improved specs and improved capabilities. That is what makes computational photography, algorithms and AI so attractive with hardware that is excellent but much smaller. In any case, comparing a Sony E mount prime lens to a Canon RF mount zoom seems like a stretch unless you only consider physical performance at 300mm.
I don’t see the point in this comparison , if the Sony is better am I going to sell all my canon gear and vice versa.
I am glad he made reference to two cameras for sports, I cant imagine many professionals shooting pro-sports with one camera/lens. Since making the reference in terms of usability it would have then good to see an image reference as well with these two cameras A9M2 v R3, so the higher megapixel of the Alpha 1 didnt affect results.
…. But that’s the very issue! Looking at a lens in isolation is pointless as it will always be used with a camera! As the Sony 300 is a fast prime for sports,I would imagine the A9M2 or Mk3 would be its perfect partner. In that case that’s the partnership that should be tested. Though in all honesty why anyone would want to do such a comparison is beyond me.