Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

devilnev

devilnev

Suspended / Banned
Messages
245
Name
Neville
Edit My Images
Yes
I am looking at getting this zoom lens Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM and wonder what the views are on it .

I want a longer lens for sport and nature, plus the other odd times you find you need one ...
this was ther other lens i was looking at first ..Canon EF 75-300mm f4/5.6 USM MK3..
 
I've had both these lenses and the 70-300mm IS USM lens is the better lens - but the 75-300mm is quite good up to 200mm but gets a bit soft after that.

And of course the 70-300mm has IS which means you can use a slower shutter speed for most (static) subjects.

If you want to see pics taken with the 75-300mm lens I have a series here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/20926615@N05/sets/72157625949886818/

and a few taken at 300mm with sharpening applied:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/20926615@N05/sets/72157625161554200/

You might be able to find one on here for about £100.

But overall the 70-300mm IS USM is the one to go for if you can't afford the 70-300mm L IS USM!

.
 
There is also a 75-300 4-5.6 IS which was previous IS version of the 70-300 IS Lens and is much better than the non IS version.
 
I did'nt like the 75-300mm because it was slow and soft but recently bought the 70-300mm is and its just awesome. I would honestly put it on par with my 70-200 L f4. Also its light and easy to carry on long trips.
 
I am fairly certain that so far i will be going for the is version it may be a little more expensive than the one with out ,thinking being that it maybe a little bit more pricey ...but at end of the day hopefully will deliver the goods .......
The L series lens will have to wait till i win lottery :lol:
 
I have had the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM for a few years now and although I am looking to replace it with either a 70-200 L with teleconvertor or the new 70-300 L I can say that it is a decent lens and you will not regret buying it.
 
the IS on it is fantastic, build quality not the greatest but mine has taken a few knocks and shrugged it off. a little soft at 300 but sharpens up fine in post processing :)
 
milspec78 said:
the IS on it is fantastic, build quality not the greatest but mine has taken a few knocks and shrugged it off. a little soft at 300 but sharpens up fine in post processing :)
Click to expand...

well i hope to be able to go and try it out this weekend ,will be having a play in my local jessops as they do not mind test driving lenses :):) ...
 
The 70-300 IS is superior to the 75-300 III. From 70 to about 250 or thereabouts the IQ is quite good...towards 300 it falls off.
 
Is the the one that some people think is a secret L in disguise?
 
pmcgsmurf said:
Is the the one that some people think is a secret L in disguise?
Click to expand...

I have this lens and a 70-200L

Optically at the short end the 70-300 gives the L lens a good run for it's money, especially in good light and unchallenging conditions.

From mid range on the 70-300 starts to lose out and by 220-250 (I know the 70-200 does not go this far) is really starting to show it's faults.

I was very pleased with my 70-300 initially but eventually would not use it above 220mm as I became displeased with the IQ.

The 70-200L is in another leauge but costs 3x as much.

Look http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=237775&highlight=70-300 for a warts and all assesment of this lens - well my copy - but I think it's pretty representitive.

HTH

David
 
I had one of these for a few years and for the money it's an ace lens. When I get home this evening I'll link to some sample images.

For the money, they're great, but an L will always be better.

Steve

Sent from my iPad using TP Forums
 
Jelster said:
I had one of these for a few years and for the money it's an ace lens. When I get home this evening I'll link to some sample images.

For the money, they're great, but an L will always be better.

Steve

Sent from my iPad using TP Forums
Click to expand...

i will look forward to seeing them ,as i will be able to see some real results from the lens i am getting
 
devilnev said:
i will look forward to seeing them ,as i will be able to see some real results from the lens i am getting
Click to expand...

Right, here we go then...

This set were all taken on the 70-300, with my 7D.

One of my favourites. 7D with the 70-300 wide open at 300mm, and at 1600 ISO.



Meerkat Portrait by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

Taken on my 40D, again wide open at 300mm



manderin by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

And finally, this one, taken at 260mm, again wide open.



Water Vole by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

All were shot in RAW and just basic exposure correction and sharpening added. I think, for the money, it's a great lens and it gives you a good introduction into getting used to using longer lenses. Even on my 7D it wasn't that shabby :thumbs:

Hope that helps...

Steve
 
Jelster said:
Right, here we go then...

This set were all taken on the 70-300, with my 7D.

One of my favourites. 7D with the 70-300 wide open at 300mm, and at 1600 ISO.
Click to expand...

Cracking shot.

Would have been ideal if you had taken it @ 200mm with the 70-300mm and then done the same with the 70-200mm @ 200mm.

Then we could have CompareTheMeerkat
 
Willid1 said:
I have this lens and a 70-200L

Optically at the short end the 70-300 gives the L lens a good run for it's money, especially in good light and unchallenging conditions.

From mid range on the 70-300 starts to lose out and by 220-250 (I know the 70-200 does not go this far) is really starting to show it's faults.

I was very pleased with my 70-300 initially but eventually would not use it above 220mm as I became displeased with the IQ.

The 70-200L is in another leauge but costs 3x as much.

Look http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=237775&highlight=70-300 for a warts and all assesment of this lens - well my copy - but I think it's pretty representitive.

HTH

David
Click to expand...

+1

Whilst it's reasonably cheap and good value for money, this lens is over hyped in my opinion and a bit soft wide open at the 300mm setting.

But...Canon don't make anything else this long until you get to the L zoom, which costs a LOT more!
 
Have to disagree with the I've. Hyped statement, the 70-300 I used originally on the 500d was fantastic all the way through when looking at bang for buck. Had I not wanted a longer lens I would have stuck with it as got some fantastic results.
 
It really depends what you're after I guess. Bang for buck, yes it's very good and there's no disputing that. But calling it a hidden L lens is a bit over the top...my old 300/4L absolutely blows it out of the water, and costs about the same as a new 70-300 IS.
 
As there are a few current and out of manufacture Canon 70-300 lenses, I understand that the OP means the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens

This One

Not these:

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

Steve
 
Jelster said:
As there are a few current and out of manufacture Canon 70-300 lenses, I understand that the OP means the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens

This One

Not these:

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

Steve
Click to expand...

this is the one i am looking at getting ,
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/30795/show.html

just come back from trying it out in the shop and so far i am sold on it ...well thats unless i win lottery tonight then it iwill be a L series lens lol...
done a few test shots out of the door with it and quality was far better than this one
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/12278/show.html

thought the links would help as the seems to be so many lenses out the
 
devilnev said:
this is the one i am looking at getting ,
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/30795/show.html

just come back from trying it out in the shop and so far i am sold on it ...well thats unless i win lottery tonight then it iwill be a L series lens lol...
done a few test shots out of the door with it and quality was far better than this one
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/12278/show.html

thought the links would help as the seems to be so many lenses out the
Click to expand...

Yep, that's the same lens as I had. Let's be honest, it's not in the same class as an "L" lens, but it is very good, delivers great images and is a great addition for the money.

Steve

Sent from my iPad using TP Forums
 
Jelster said:
Yep, that's the same lens as I had. Let's be honest, it's not in the same class as an "L" lens, but it is very good, delivers great images and is a great addition for the money.

Steve

Sent from my iPad using TP Forums
Click to expand...


yes i know its a trade off ,get the best i can till i can afford a L class lens ,at moment i am tied to getting it and getting it from jessops ,as my birthday soon so have asked for vouchers for jessops lol ....well it will save me some money that way .....so sigma is out as jessops do tamron and not had good reports on them, ie the AF is sluggish
 
devilnev said:
yes i know its a trade off ,get the best i can till i can afford a L class lens ,at moment i am tied to getting it and getting it from jessops ,as my birthday soon so have asked for vouchers for jessops lol ....well it will save me some money that way .....so sigma is out as jessops do tamron and not had good reports on them, ie the AF is sluggish
Click to expand...

Oh, don't get me wrong, it took me a number of years before I bought my first L lens. I actually think that this particular lens is very good for the money. If it wasn't for me needing the cash for other lenses I'd still have mine. :thumbs:

Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top