canon lenses

G

gboy

Suspended / Banned
Messages
197
Name
geoff
Edit My Images
No
hi all, can you please tell me what you think of these 2 lenses. the first one is the canon ef 75-300mm /4-5,6/111usm. the price is £80. the second is the canon 70-200 f 4l the price is £375. i have a canon 450d and the 18-55mm lens. i am a complete novice. so i am looking for a few more lenses. hope you can help. kind regards. gboy.
 
the glaring difference is the reach.. if you can do without 300 then go for the 70-200 as thats an L class lens.. the best canon lens are L ...Also f4 is better than f4.5 and the 70-200 is fixed aperture throughout the zoom and wont change... the price differnce between 80 and 375 is big.. so is the lens difference
 
A bit more detailed differences, Kipax hit the main differences on the head.

The 70-200 f4L is probably the sharpest lens out there for the money, it's solidly built, doesn't have a front rotating focus element, constant aperture throughout the range, super fast auto focus, silent focus motor, but doesn't have the reach of the 75-300.

As for the 75-300, it'll be softer than the L glass (Not as 'well focussed pictures'), slow auto focus in comparison, non constant aperture through the focal range, but has the extra reach that the 70-200 doesn't have.

You get what you pay for really, and the 70-200 is THAT much better than the 75-300.

Here's a review of both.

Canon 75-300

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=18&sort=7&cat=27&page=3

Canon 70-200 F4L

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=14&sort=7&cat=27&page=3
 
hi kipax & ant, thank you both so much for the advice. much appreciated. kindest regards. gboy. :thumbs:
 
Yeah, big difference between those two lenses.

Just to throw something in the middle, have you considered the Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG MACRO?

I own one and it`s pretty damn good considering the price of around 160 pounds. I checked reviews before buying it and it`s generally regarded as being a pretty sound choice.

Apparently the edges are a bit soft at 300mm, but you`ll only really notice this if you`re using a full-frame camera, which you`re not.
 
you can always add a 1.4x converter to the 70-200 as well in the future, taking it to 280mm f/5.6.
 
As others have said, the 70-200 is sharper and better built. The other option to throw into the mix is the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS which is meant to be much better than the 75-300 and also throws in image stabilisation as well. It's about the same price as the 70-200 f/4 and lots of people rave about it. I don't have personal experience of it, but those that do seem very pleased.
 
i have palyed with both and my mate tha owns both of them uses the 75-300 as a door stop now! The sharpness of the 70-200F4 blows it out of the water.

honestly my list of preference would be as follows

canon 75-300mm III f/4-5.6 USM
sigma 70-300mm APO f/4-5.6 ( I have had this and it was not too bad but can get soft at the long end)
canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (some say this is near L glass quality)
Canon 70-200mm f/4 L USM

That is the order i would work in for quality. if you can afford the 70-200 go for it!
 
or you could go middle of the road with the 55-250, still not as good as the 70-200, but it does have IS and is around half the cost. Just a thought.
 
Hi, gboy,
In brief, the 75-300 is rubbish. Steer clear.
Andy.
 
Android said:
Hi, gboy,
In brief, the 75-300 is rubbish. Steer clear.
Andy.
Click to expand...

Just to add.... The 70-300 is much better; people get them confused, I have the 70-300 IS USM which isn't L glass, but it's a pretty good lens.

If you can afford it, go for the 70-200 F4L (that L glass is a major upgrade)

Steve
 
hi, a big thank you. you have certainly given me plenty of food for thought. much appreciated for all your help. kindest regards. gboy. :thumbs:
 
Craft said:
or you could go middle of the road with the 55-250, still not as good as the 70-200, but it does have IS and is around half the cost. Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Seconded.

I think I'm turning into a 'nifty-two-fifty' evangelist...:shake:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top