Has anyone handheld a 300 2.8?

[nellyleelephant]

As above really.

In a months or so time I shall be looking to buy a Canon 300 2.8 IS version i, I know it will be heavy, most of the time I shall no doubt have it on a monopod, just wondering how realistic hand holding is (with a 1 series body)

Thanks!

[ehasler]

I owned one for a few years, and used it with a 1 series body. It is heavy, but I used it hand-held without too many issues other than aching arms at the end of a day!

[S47]

Neely
Provided you're reasonably fit a 300 f2.8 is no problem, its only 2.5kg or so - If you're in any doubt use it on a monopod.
I've seen plenty of fit females using 500 F4's without a tripod or monopod, so you ought to have no probs whatsoever.
Just enjoy using it and don't worry about the weight

[nellyleelephant]

Thanks!

I have two options open to me...

1. Get the version ii which is a bit lighter and add a 1D3
2. Get the version i and add a 1D4

Leaning towards option 2 at the moment, but can be swayed.

I had a 1D2N which I sold last year, I use a 1DS2 which is great, but doesn't cover action as well (which I expected)

[TheBlondeFella]

I rented the new version from Fixation last year and combined with a 1D mkiv for a freelance job. I hand held it all day with no worries. My arms were getting a little tired by the end of the day though! :0)

Edited by TheBlondeFella on Thursday 14th March 12:49

[RobDickinson]

I've done the 400/2.8, along with the 120-300/2.8, hh will be no problem if your average strength

[Craikeybaby]

I rented the mk1 a few years back and used it handheld with a 1D body and while it was heavy, I found it usable for a weekends motorsport.

[nellyleelephant]

Thanks for the responses, Within the next month I should be ordering...assuming one is available at the time, plus a 1D4, again, assuming I can find one, they seem to be rare!

[nellyleelephant]

RobDickinson said:

I've done the 400/2.8, along with the 120-300/2.8, hh will be no problem if your average strength

The 400, everywhere else I've read, says it's not possible to handhold for any length of time (certainly not disputing you!) how did you get on with it? The weight is all that puts me off that lens, 11 lbs is a fair chunk!

Without being all PH Directorish, I'm not exactly puny, maybe I should be looking into the 400 too.

[DamienB]

The 300 2.8 is eminently hand-holdable. I've used it for years like that. However, I've got a bad back... and using it to shoot airshow stuff soon exacerbates that to the point where I actively avoided doing so. The tiny differences in weight between Canon's own and anybody else's, or the Mk.1 and Mk.II are just that - tiny - totally insignificant in practical everyday use.

The 400 2.8 is, in my opinion, *not* a sensible option for hand holding for any length of time at all. You will definitely do yourself some harm over any significant period of time.

[RobDickinson]

The 400 was a mk2 rest iron you're leg with the foot in between shooting. Worked OK for a few hours

[S47]

I've Handheld the Awesome 400 F2.8 IS for ~5 years [and normally carry a 2nd body with 70-300 'L' or 35-350 'L']. I've hiked all day walking the major peaks in UK with this setup
300 F2.8 is positively light in comparison. As I wrote in my first response don't worry/think of the weight, just work out how to use the lens easily. It ain't rocket science, if you want to save some weight buy a 7d instead of the 1d4
There's no substitute for good glass

[nellyleelephant]

The 7d, 400 option is looking tempting. I could always add a 300 f4.