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

[Michael_2010]

Any opinions on this lens?

[inkista]

lensrentals's Roger Cicala says it's pretty much like a smaller 100-400L. Initially, he said he was underwhelmed, but he's since reversed that since he's had time to play with it.

[Michael_2010]

Interesting..... The 70-300mm seems like a nice focal range and the Canon write-up reads well.

Why does aperture cost so much money? Anything larger than 4 gets into some serious bucks except for the nifty fifty.

[inkista]

Glass element/lens barrel size and precision required in making same. Visual demonstration:



Guess which one's the f/1.2 lens?

Also, the optical engineering is tougher the wider you go, particularly for coma, astigmatism, spherical aberration, and chromatic aberration. Or so says Roger Cicala. I just parrot everything he says, because the dude knows lenses.

[LewisCanon]

the reviews ive seen of it so far... it looks like it produces amazing IQ....
i see it as sort of a cross between the 70-200 f4 is and the 100-400 L... i think i want one... as it costs just £200 more than the 70-200f4 is in the UK and so.... i think it offers me a pretty good focal range with amazing IQ and decent apertures....

i think i want one. i think.

[bribears]

I have a 70-300 and love it. I mostly use it for wildlife and sport shots. I have been shooting DSLR for 7 months, so take my words with general lack of experience. That said, I did shoot a football game with a pro photographer a couple months ago. They had a 70-200 f2.8L IS lens. I we switched lenses for a quarter. The pro was pretty impressed with the 70-300 considering it is almost a third of the price of the 70-200. I personally am saving up for a 70-200 2.8 because I loved the increased ability for creativity that a constant f-stop provides. That said, I know I will be conflicted regarding selling the 70-300 because of the extra 100mm it provides while still taking fine pictures, even compared to the 70-200 under the same conditions.

If you shoot wildlife\sports and are looking for a good lens to start with, this is it. I tried the 55-250 and was very underwhelmed. Purchase knowing though, that if you have the same experience as I, you may have the urge to upgrade later because the 70-300 will expand your ability to the point where there will be desire to go the "next level".

[Michael_2010]

Originally Posted by LewisCanon

the reviews ive seen of it so far... it looks like it produces amazing IQ....
i see it as sort of a cross between the 70-200 f4 is and the 100-400 L... i think i want one... as it costs just £200 more than the 70-200f4 is in the UK and so.... i think it offers me a pretty good focal range with amazing IQ and decent apertures....

i think i want one. i think.

I think I think I might want one too, but still just in the thinking stage right now. I've read good things about this one and I like the focal range. I would much rather it have a constant f4 across that range, but.....

[Michael_2010]

Originally Posted by bribears

I have a 70-300 and love it. I mostly use it for wildlife and sport shots. I have been shooting DSLR for 7 months, so take my words with general lack of experience. That said, I did shoot a football game with a pro photographer a couple months ago. They had a 70-200 f2.8L IS lens. I we switched lenses for a quarter. The pro was pretty impressed with the 70-300 considering it is almost a third of the price of the 70-200. I personally am saving up for a 70-200 2.8 because I loved the increased ability for creativity that a constant f-stop provides. That said, I know I will be conflicted regarding selling the 70-300 because of the extra 100mm it provides while still taking fine pictures, even compared to the 70-200 under the same conditions.

If you shoot wildlife\sports and are looking for a good lens to start with, this is it. I tried the 55-250 and was very underwhelmed. Purchase knowing though, that if you have the same experience as I, you may have the urge to upgrade later because the 70-300 will expand your ability to the point where there will be desire to go the "next level".

The first lens I bought after getting my dSLR w/kit lens was a Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS, because it was a bargain (I thought). Now, I don't care for the lens at all. The IQ looks soft and mushy when compared to shots taken with my nifty fifty and my 10-22mm. I found the focal range to be very versatile, but I just can't live with the IQ now that I know my camera can produce better results with the right lenses.

This lens lust business may need a 12-Step program!!!

[LewisCanon]

Originally Posted by Michael_2010

I think I think I might want one too, but still just in the thinking stage right now. I've read good things about this one and I like the focal range. I would much rather it have a constant f4 across that range, but.....

same as me, id prefer to keep it at f4, but your gaining the 100mm... sorry 160mm in my case on the long end with SUPERB IQ, and its only 1 stop.......
for indoor gigs and stuff it probably isnt a good choice, but id rather go 50mm 1.4 135mm 2.0 for gigs anyway...
i think im going to get one.
(edit: having said that ive used a 55-250 at gigs and got some good shots, this is only gonna be better.... for shots from sound board, balconies etc)

[LewisCanon]

Originally Posted by bribears

I have a 70-300 and love it. I mostly use it for wildlife and sport shots. I have been shooting DSLR for 7 months, so take my words with general lack of experience. That said, I did shoot a football game with a pro photographer a couple months ago. They had a 70-200 f2.8L IS lens. I we switched lenses for a quarter. The pro was pretty impressed with the 70-300 considering it is almost a third of the price of the 70-200. I personally am saving up for a 70-200 2.8 because I loved the increased ability for creativity that a constant f-stop provides. That said, I know I will be conflicted regarding selling the 70-300 because of the extra 100mm it provides while still taking fine pictures, even compared to the 70-200 under the same conditions.

If you shoot wildlife\sports and are looking for a good lens to start with, this is it. I tried the 55-250 and was very underwhelmed. Purchase knowing though, that if you have the same experience as I, you may have the urge to upgrade later because the 70-300 will expand your ability to the point where there will be desire to go the "next level".

i think your referring to the 70-300 NON L lens.... this discussion is over the new L version.... however you raise a good point, the 70-300 is is a good lens, the L from what ive seen makes it look like a fisher price toy, ever sample pic ive seen from the L has been amazing.