Sony 300mm f/2.8 GM Review vs Canon 100-300mm f/2.8: PRIME vs ZOOM!

FROPACK4 is HERE with 14 all-new custom Lightroom presets!!! Check it out

Want to send us gifts, swag, letters...here's our P.O. BOX
PO Box 3715 Philadelphia, PA 19125

Gear I USE
My Go To Mirrorless Camera for Stills
Our go to Cameras for Recording Videos at FroKnowsPhoto

Follow me

Please help us continue to make FREE content
by purchasing one or all of the FroKnowsPhoto
Educational guides. To check out previews of
each guide click here.

#FroKnowsPhoto #JaredPolin #Review

[jeffkernen]

I use the Canon 300mm for a lot more than sports. I shoot a lot of events, theatre, concerts, speeches, etc. The versatility of the 100-300mm would be perfect for my work. Hope to add it to my bag sometime soon.

[joemoss]

@jared polin how did you get your start at being able to get press passes for sporting events? did you have to be well known first? do you sign something giving all photos to the club? thanks for the great content!

[benjhaisch]

That 300/2.8GM is unreal. Use APS-C crop on the A1 and you’ve got the reach. Love the 100-300 concept though.

[iankeel]

The opening is to stop the hood cover slipping when you take it off, you grip the lens hood with your thumb through the cut out, then release the velcro and remove the cover.

[fruhfruh]

Idk why I watch these 😅 I’m broke as a joke but always enjoy the content
Thanks to fro and Stephen for crushing as always

[kellenholt]

Preface: I can’t afford either of these lenses so I’m just an armchair speculator here 😅

I think you raise some good points here, but as I watched I kept wondering - how would the script of this video had changed if the Canon 100-300 didn’t exist? It seemed like a lot of the “negatives” of this lens were basically only because there is a 100-300 option on the market from Canon. It almost felt like this video was trying to pump up the canon lens rather than review the Sony lens. Not sure what the motivations behind this video was but that’s how it came off to me.

[ph_anto]

Masterpiece of a lens. I hope in a 500/4 with this specs

[guruvishnu]

Thanks for being there for your friend Manny Ortiz Appreciate it brother

[GV]

When I shot Nikon and before that Pentax (yes, I’m old) a compact 300mm +TC was my bread and butter for wildlife and nature to which I had to hike long distances. Rarely wanted wider, often used the converters. Sony had no 300mm prime at all, so it was the 100-400. This looks fantastic with a 2.8 aperture. Now I just need the bucks.

[StanislavDuben]

This lens is absolutely MUST HAVE for me. I am waiting so long, I am happy I can order it. For versatility I have great Sony 200-600 or 70-200. I had in past Nikkor 400/2.8 with Nikon D3s, it was great combo, but only used for my animal photos, other photo shooting was not good as it was very long, very heavy. 300mm is much universal and with this weight? Amazing. For animals I am very often shooting from hand, weight is very important for me. So I am really looking to buy it when it will be possible. ... thanks for review btw ;)

[kpopfanphotos]

This is such an objective review I'm actually really impressed with the arguments for and against tbis lens.
I bought the 100-300 and it's insane. It replaced almost my entire setup, but i have some friends who shoot Sony and i was even impressed seeing this release. We got into talking about how Sony might have been late to the 300, but how that the size and weight was absurd.
I even like the part where you mentioned about how zooms and primes theres no difference really in sharpness these days. I've seen a lot of people still say they would rather have the ef 300 2.8 because it's sharper because its a prime. I have to question if these people have ever shot with modern lenses. Almost all lenses from like the last 5 or even more years are equally sharp haha.

I do wish the rf 100-300 had that snap on hood the sony has though. That i am envious of. I hate the screw on hood sometimes. I dont regret my 100-300 purchase though. Most expensive lens I've ever bought but it's such an insane piece of engineering and so is this Sony 300 2.8. I think shooters from both brands would be happy with either these days.
Whichever brand you shoot its always exciting to see what the competition is doing 👍

[dustinbowdige]

I have the 200-600 shooting sports. Is it worth it to upgrade?

[tonybella]

they do indeed still make sit and spins. my 2yo loves it

[DieHardEddieEdwards]

How did the A9 III feel in your hands? I really wanted to ask that last week.

[jeroenvdw]

Guess that's why many pros use Sony bodies with Canon lenses for sports. Using 1 camera with the 300 2.8 and 1 camera with a 70-200 2.8 would be another option I guess.

[danpedraza]

Well, I had this dilemma what you're talking about around the 11:30 mark, I had a Canon 300mm 2.8, but I felt limited so I bought a Sigma 120-300mm sports to replace my prime.

[terrymcnavage]

Is there any way to protect the front lens element with a screw on UV filter?

[yewtewbtoo]

Well for you and shooting sports the zoom may be the better choice, but for the vast majority of wildlife photographers, they are mostly shooting at 300+mm, so the prime is a better choice for the lighter weight, and the lower cost for those with the smaller budget. Personally, I would be able to carry the prime around a lot longer, and it would be a lot easier to quickly maneuver for shooting action.

[vdan]

10:41 This is why I'm shooting football (as you call, soccer) with a 200-600 f5.6-6.3. Even if the 600 is at 6.3 which is less than desirable, I get a great shot from the opposite side of the field if something is happening there, and I can pull back to 200 should something happen closer to me. For closer moments I'll go with my 24-70 2.8, and I know the middle ground is lost but the versatility of those two lenses are more than enough for me. I know a prime lens has its pros but in general, the versatility of a zoom will trump the prime in 99 cases out of 100.

[TooGood]

6:24 I use the same portable chair. 🙌🏾. I have 3 and they are Knee Savers 🥴