Opinions on the Canon 70-300 IS?

instigator

instigator

Suspended / Banned
Messages
98
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
Yes
I am thinking about buying this lens but i have read a few reviews about it being soft at 300mm, since this is probably where i will use it most i am a little worried by this.

Has anybody used this lens or has one that can give me their opinions on it?

Thanks in advance.
 
Yeah, it's awesome! It's considered marginally inferior to the 70-200 f/4 in terms of image quality (and not so good compared to built quality), but it's cheaper and has an extra 100mm and IS. Both the shots below were at 300mm (not great shots, but just to give you an idea), and the green woodpecker is a BIG crop, with awful grey light!





Hope it helps a bit, here's a review of it as well!

Chris
 
Love mine to bits. Had my first chance to use it in anger over the weekend and it performed adminrably.

The IS really does help at long focal lengths. When you half press the shutter to focus, you can see the IS kick in and the contents of the viewfinder stop wobbling around all over the place, as if by magic. It also has "Mode 2 IS" which only stabilises the vertical axis if panning shots are your thing.

As for soft at 300mm, well I think it's probably all relative. Mine is a lot sharper than my friends Tamron 75-300, but probably a lot softer than a Canon 300mm L series lens. I'll post a link when I get my Donington shots up as most of these were shot at 200-300mm.

The only issue I have with it is that Canon don't provide a hood when you buy it. The Canon one is another £35 to buy seperately, but I picked up a copy from 7dayshop for about a tenner which does the job.

If buying second hand, check Canons site for a recall notice to see if yours is affected. Some of the earlier ones had issues with focus, especially when used in portrait. It's a free fix if required.
 
I have the 70-300 IS and find it a very good lens and have no complaints well worth the money.
 
this will have been at about 70 mm

3711750843_4f901de228.jpg


and this was at 300 mm , around 30 metres away , with a big crop

3689792010_b3658f7314.jpg


not the best in the world , but it should give you an idea that it can and does perform :)
 
There are a few stand-out lenses in the Canon range (I don't know other brands so well) and the 70-300 IS is one of them.

You often hear tales about long zooms being 'soft at the long end' and while that may be technically true, they are usually not that soft at all - just a tad less bitingly sharp.

What I think is happening is that if you put 300mm on a crop camera, you have getting on for 500mm of equivalent focal length. Then people crop it a bit, and you're up to 1000mm equivalent in no time. That is huge, and you need really good technique to nail focus absolutely and have an absolutely shake-free stance, even at high shutter speeds. Of course IS helps, but even so I've seen more than a few images on here where folks have been quick to blame the lens, when they ought to be looking closer to home.

Get that lens. It's really very good. You won't get a sharper 300mm this side of a prime costing several times the price.
 
HoppyUK said:
There are a few stand-out lenses in the Canon range (I don't know other brands so well) and the 70-300 IS is one of them.

You often hear tales about long zooms being 'soft at the long end' and while that may be technically true, they are usually not that soft at all - just a tad less bitingly sharp.

What I think is happening is that if you put 300mm on a crop camera, you have getting on for 500mm of equivalent focal length. Then people crop it a bit, and you're up to 1000mm equivalent in no time. That is huge, and you need really good technique to nail focus absolutely and have an absolutely shake-free stance, even at high shutter speeds. Of course IS helps, but even so I've seen more than a few images on here where folks have been quick to blame the lens, when they ought to be looking closer to home.

Get that lens. It's really very good. You won't get a sharper 300mm this side of a prime costing several times the price.
Click to expand...


excellent post , i was that person , i am not anymore , learn what the lens is capable of and you wont be disappointed i reckon :)

3739469393_77f2223932.jpg


not the best photo in the world technically , taken at 70mm from about 4 metres :)
 
thanks for all the replies and photos everyone, its helped me out alot on making my mind up.
 
Great lens, has shot up almost £100 since I bought mine 6 months ago ***.

The only problem I have with it is when firing off a burst of panning shots I find that it bounces out of focus after a short burst. Very strange, but it only happens occasionally.

Most of the motorsport shots on my flickr are taken with this lens :)
 
it's a good lens...I don't think I get the best out of it, but this was taken at Silverstone a year or two ago, 300mm if i remember correctly and very little (probably none) PP:

silverstone_tp.jpg
 
thanks for all the advice and photo examples guys, i think this lens will be next on my list, just got to save some money up skinting myself buying a canon 10-22. :bang:

Its hard to live without a telephoto, i used to love taking photos of birds in the garden with my 55-250, i think i would really appreciate the extra length of the 70-300.
 
You wont be disapointed, I've had one for a couple of years now and it's always performed admirably, I just wish it was longer :p I've found it to be a little soft at 300mm when wide open, but thats true of many lenes and nothing that cant be overcome by either stoping it down or some sharpening in PP.
 
:agree: As above really, I'm very pleased with mine, don't think you'd be disappointed :thumbs:
 
I find mine to be sharp at 200, and a little soft at 300 in real life.
I have not really been able to reproduce this with test shots taken at the same distance though, so probably user error.
Have you looked in the for-sale on this board recently?
 
love my 70-300IS
would prefer L glass but it's a lot more money!
300mm is a little soft but with a 70-300 lens you can pull back a bit to 260-280 and it should improve. the limits of any zoom lens at this budget and this range will always be a slightly limited
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top