Canon 75-300 f/4.0-5.6 IS USM lens. Any good? Bought a 55-250 IS. Thanks everyone!

wontolla

wontolla

Misery Guts Monica
Suspended / Banned
Messages
8,501
Name
I'm not a Misery Guts and Monica is not my Moniker
Edit My Images
Yes
I am thinking of buying this lens. It's about 2 years old but seen very little use.
Looking at £225 + post. What do you think guys & gals? Worth it? Stay clear?
Opinions gratefully recieved.
 
If you can afford the extra for the 70-300 IS USM, get that one as, from all the research I did while looking at the same focal range, it is a much better lens. Really pleased with mine.
You should be able to pick up one S/H for about £300 (check the For Sale forum, I think there's one going at the moment)
 
Would agree with the above, the 70-300 IS lens is a newer and better lens to go for - definately worth the slight extra in price :thumbs:
 
Hmmm, I could be very wrong, but the last 75-300 IS USM lens was made many years ago - I doubt its only 2 years old. In fact, was this not Canon's first ever SLR lens with IS??

Now-adays the only 75-300 USM lenses about are the non IS version which has been around for donkeys years!

http://www.camerabox.co.uk/productD...F-75-300mm-F4-5.6-III-USM-Lens&ProductID=4201

Image quality from both the IS and non IS versions of the 75-300 USM are supposed to be pretty poor. You'll be better off with the 70-300 IS USM, as already stated, or if your budget doesnt stretch to that, the 55-250 IS which has better IQ and can be bought brand new for about £180.
 
I think oddjim is correct about the 75-300 IS USM being the first IS lens introduced by Canon. Photozone did a review of the 70-300 IS USM which replaced replaced the 75-300. The review was carried out in November 2005 when the 70-300 was "brand new". In that review Photozone comment that the 75-300 was introduced in 1995 and was the first IS lens to hit the market. All of this suggests that the lens Wontolla is considering is not 2 years old. The Photozone review of the 70-300 hints at the 75-300 noyt being that special and confirms the views already expressed that the 70-300 is the lens to look out for of these 2 at that focal length range - although, of course, there could be others.
 
75-300 IS was a pig, just like the 75-300 USM II/III.

CA's all over the place... blurgh!

And then Canon came along with the 70-300 IS, with CA firmly under control, its peachy.

Leave the old crap alone would be my suggestion...
 
Thanks everyone for the info and reccomendations! I think I will give it a miss and save my money for something else!
I have been looking also at this ONE on Amazon. Is this what you reccomend odd-jim?
 
desantnik said:
75-300 IS was a pig, just like the 75-300 USM II/III.

CA's all over the place... blurgh!

And then Canon came along with the 70-300 IS, with CA firmly under control, its peachy.

Leave the old crap alone would be my suggestion...
Click to expand...

I will probably regret asking this, but my brain has stopped working because of the heat, but what is CA?
 
wontolla said:
Thanks everyone for the info and reccomendations! I think I will give it a miss and save my money for something else!
I have been looking also at this ONE on Amazon. Is this what you reccomend odd-jim?
Click to expand...

The 55-250 IS lens is a good lens - slightly shorter (obviously !) than the 70-300 and cheaper to buy - build is also cheaper (plastic mount vs metal mount), BUT this is not an issue, gets very good reviews.

If you can't afford to stretch to the 70-300, this is a good 2nd choice :thumbs:
 
The 75-300 IS is a reasonable lens, however quite soft at 300mm, it is pin sharp however from 75-150ish mm. It is different optically from the 75-300 non IS, but not as good as the 70-300 IS. The others are right as well, it won't be a 75-300 IS that is 2 years old, they were replaced before that.
 
I'd save a bit more and buy a used 70-300 IS. Much improvement IMO.
Although it's even better to save a little extra more and buy 70-200 f/4 L :D Much better built, faster and more accurate autofocus (important)
 
packham said:
I'd save a bit more and buy a used 70-300 IS. Much improvement IMO.
Although it's even better to save a little extra more and buy 70-200 f/4 L :D Much better built, faster and more accurate autofocus (important)
Click to expand...

Once again, cheers folks!
I dont think the 70-200 will be quite long enough as i do lots of bird hide work.
250 would probably be my minimum and with the 55-250 hopefully the iq would be better to take cropping?
 
wontolla said:
250 would probably be my minimum and with the 55-250 hopefully the iq would be better to take cropping?
Click to expand...

And if you found the 55-250 IS lens wasn't quite long enough, you shouldn't have any problem selling it on and trading up.

Good luck and let us know what you decide to get :thumbs:
 
wontolla said:
Once again, cheers folks!
I dont think the 70-200 will be quite long enough as i do lots of bird hide work.
250 would probably be my minimum and with the 55-250 hopefully the iq would be better to take cropping?
Click to expand...

You can crop with this lens fine.

I can put up some pics I've taken with mine if it helps? (it is the lens in your link by the way!)
 
I would also recommend stretching to the 70-300 IS USM if you possibly can. I used to own one and it really does give stunning results.

Have a look at the full review from Photozone.

snip from their verdict.......
It seems as if the new UD element helps to lift the optical quality significantly. Distortions, CAs as well as vignetting are also very respectable. So in terms of optical quality the EF 70-300mm IS can be almost described as a hidden Canon L lens
Click to expand...
 
^ think he's decided the 70-300 is out of his budget.

Tis a great lens though!
 
There are many variations of the 70-300mm or 75-300mm lens manufactured by canon. The canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM is probably the best of the bunch and new cost around the £400-450 mark currently.

Lots of people get confused which lenses are which.

There are 70-300mm budget lenses (non IS) version III current model, 75-300mm versions (IS) and (non IS) all not great lenses and then finally the 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 DO IS USM (expensive £1100) with very mixed reviews but predominantly saying that is soft focusing, although it is compact for a 70-300mm lens (personally not worth the money).

Save you money and get a 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM
 
FWIW, I have the 70-300 IS USM, and many of the wildlife/motorsport shots in my gallery were taken using it on both my 350D, and my 40D.

Steve
 
Once again you have all done me proud on my request!
Problem is I am still not too sure which one I REALLY want.
At the moment I am between the 55-250 is which I can get now, or the 70-300 is that I will have to wait till I save a few more pounds (well another few hundred quid!)
I am thinking about selling my Siggy 70-300 1:4-5.6 DG Macro as I have a 55-200 Tamron to use meanwhile.
I will let you know which I plumb for eventually
Cheers all!
 
odd jim said:
You can crop with this lens fine.

I can put up some pics I've taken with mine if it helps? (it is the lens in your link by the way!)
Click to expand...

YES PLEASE! i would be more than gratefull. It might decide me one way or the other. Thanks.
 
Sorry, been away for a while! Here's a few from my 55-250 IS;

1 - Lizard at Marwell. Taken through the glass, the IS helped here due to the low light;
IMG_8247.jpg


2 - I do a lot of equine photography which its very capable of;
IMG_7976.jpg


I know the framings not perfect on this one, but it was shot from the hip and the 250 focused pretty quickly!
IMG_8026.jpg


3 - Very good for motorsport;
IMG_7271.jpg


IMG_5789.jpg


Though it'll never be as good as L glass, for the money I think its a pretty good lens!
 
getnoticed said:
Thanks odd jim :)
Click to expand...

Cheers for the pics mate! Sorry took so long to say thanks!
You have made my mind up and I have ordered the 55-250 IS.
I am now looking for an 18-55 IS to compliment it!
Have to put a wanted add on the site.
Thanks for all the replies, it really helped with my choice!
 
wontolla said:
At the moment I am between the 55-250 is which I can get now, or the 70-300 is that I will have to wait till I save a few more pounds (well another few hundred quid!)
I am thinking about selling my Siggy 70-300 1:4-5.6 DG Macro as I have a 55-200 Tamron to use meanwhile.
Click to expand...

So you have 2 lenses covering 70-200 (plus a bit either side) and are thinking of a third to do the same?

FWIW I would seriously consider selling the lot and getting the 70-200mm F4L. Because that's so sharp you may well find you can crop down to 300mm equiv. without any problems. Secondly it will hold it's value better. Thirdly you can add a 1.4x tc to take it to 280mm F5.6 anyway.

HTH
 
still going on with this?
my main thing is that you might want to get to 300mm and can back off a bit to improve sharpness. 250 would be a little short for me

this was taken on my 70-300IS. I would still go for the IS version over a non IS sigma alternative if you can manage the budget

img_1238.azl9x8vkw9c8g4cwc880wsgs4.1pwjqr2s8vms0k4wgskgokccg.th.jpeg
 
pearce_jj said:
So you have 2 lenses covering 70-200 (plus a bit either side) and are thinking of a third to do the same?

FWIW I would seriously consider selling the lot and getting the 70-200mm F4L. Because that's so sharp you may well find you can crop down to 300mm equiv. without any problems. Secondly it will hold it's value better. Thirdly you can add a 1.4x tc to take it to 280mm F5.6 anyway.

HTH
Click to expand...

Thanks for the suggestions, but the L is way out of my reach at the mo as i have other gear that I want (need!) When my 55-250 arrives the Tamron & Siggy will be sold to fund the other stuff.
 
DizMatt said:
still going on with this?
my main thing is that you might want to get to 300mm and can back off a bit to improve sharpness. 250 would be a little short for me

this was taken on my 70-300IS. I would still go for the IS version over a non IS sigma alternative if you can manage the budget

Nice pic! Yeh I understand what you say but as the Siggy is very soft at 240-300, i rarley use that end anyway so the 55-250 will give me a slightly better range and I will be able to crop better with it anyhow. Cheers.
Click to expand...
 
Had it one day and popped into the back garden for a few shots. Very impressed so far! In fact I have just bought the 18-55 IS as well and both for the original budget of £225!!! (One new the other slightly used)
Going out on Wed to Trough of Bowland so hopefully get some good pics.

Thanks everyone for your input and advice, it really did help!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top