data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e852a/e852acede76760891cc180246ca2a0d4d1afa66d" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a2e12/a2e12833270a1e55c900d8b87312e6fea3e31eb7" alt=""
The wonderful thing about this lens is that it is the biggest hand holdable lens in Canon's line. How do I know it is hand holdable? Easy, Canon makes the tripod collar removable and I haven't had it on the lens for over a year. Next obvious question is, aren't all the tripod collars removable? Nope! The slightly bigger brother to this lens is the 400mm f/2.8L IS, that I also own, has a permanent tripod collar. That puppy is just too heavy for hand holding, particularly on a 1D body. This is not to say some people don't do it ... but it is usually on a monopod, although I use mine on a big Gitzo legset with leveling head and Wimberley head. I'm including images of the 300mm f/2.8L IS on this big tripod setup, but isn't how I use it.
The Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS as seen on B&H PhotoVideo isn't cheap ... here's the full description link with a price of $4100, slightly MORE than I paid for it over two years ago. This is one of those classic lenses, like the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS that are so popular that they keep their value over long periods of time.
Here's an image of KC, from KC and the Sunshine band.
When shooting concerts at the casino I almost always have this lens on one of the two 1DMIII bodies I use. I carry both bodies with me, setting one or the other on the floor as I shoot, usually filling the buffer and switching to the other body/lens combination at that point. The images are usually superb from both, but there is something just a little sharper, a little contrastier and brighter from the 300mm f/2.8L IS. The only downside is that you can accidentally get too close and get inside the minimum focal distance.
And an image of the saxophonist from B.B. King's band.
This is a great lens. I have loaned mine a couple of times and caused several to be purchased.
Be Safe!
Dwight