Canon D-SLR Lens Review

Tysonator · 23-08-2007, 11:58

Hi, has any body got or used the following Lens
Canon EF 70-300mm f 4-5-6 USM IS

I have read a few reviews on the web and it is rated reasonbly well as a consumer lens. The next step up professional lens cost about £850 compared to £380 for the above lens.

Cheers

Dr. Z · 23-08-2007, 21:06

I had the non-IS version and have sampled both the IS and APO versions of this lens.

All I will say is that you can pick up the 70-200 for similar money second hand and whilst you dont quite have the length of the 70-300 you have a massively better lens. The fact its F4 at 200mm kinda makes up for the lack of IS too, but then you might not have as steady hands as I do...

You could also add in a 1.4 TC at a later date to give you the length and the quality for the same aperture as the one above, but all the while retaining the fantastic quality of the L series glass (or very, very close to it with the TC).

EDIT: I sold my 70-200 to Pebbles and kinda regret it. I miss it every time I pick up my camera and it really felt like selling a kidney. My best shots came through that lens too

Mondo · 24-08-2007, 14:56

check out this site for reviews and sample pics

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

Tysonator · 24-08-2007, 20:12

I have just purchased a Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro (Sigma AF) and it is a lovely lens, very crip natural images. As it has a filter ring og 72mm, making it a fast lens.

I will be selling in a few months a Tamron 55-200mm f/4-5.6 Di II LD Macro (Canon AF). Again a very good lens

Dr. Z · 24-08-2007, 22:02

Sorry to be an arse, but why do you think having a 72mm filter ring size makes the lens fast? Its got nowt to do with any of the factors that make a lens "fast" - be that autofocus or aperture. F/4.5 @ 70mm isnt all that fast either, really - although I'm sure I have read good things about it

Tysonator · 25-08-2007, 20:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRZ

Sorry to be an arse, but why do you think having a 72mm filter ring size makes the lens fast? Its got nowt to do with any of the factors that make a lens "fast" - be that autofocus or aperture. F/4.5 @ 70mm isnt all that fast either, really - although I'm sure I have read good things about it

There has been good reviews about this lens on he web, as that was one of the reason's why I brought it. All I can say is that it is alot faster than my standard 18-55mm Canon lens that came with my 400D. Also tje pictures look a little more clearer as well.

Mondo · 25-08-2007, 20:18

by fast in lenses means low light performance, not fast focusing. F4.5 isn't that fast, F2.8 is fast. filter size has nothing to do with aperture.

Tysonator · 25-08-2007, 20:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raymond Lin

by fast in lenses means low light performance, not fast focusing. F4.5 isn't that fast, F2.8 is fast. filter size has nothing to do with aperture.

Yep,..this lens goes down to F2.8.
Though I thought that coupled with filter size front lens of 72mm would allow more light in any way ! ?:undecided:

Mondo · 25-08-2007, 21:33

when you press the depth of field preview button you can see the aperture blades close up, it is that control the light. filter size doesn't affect the speed of the lens.

petemc · 26-08-2007, 00:50

I have a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 lens and a Canon 24-70 f/2.8 lens. The sigma filter size is 82mm and the Canon is 77mm. That means that the Sigma lens is bigger, nothing more. They both stop down to f/2.8 allowing the same amount of light through them. I have a Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens which is, I think, 52mm and yet allows more light through than the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 with its 82mm filter size. Its the aperture that determines the amount of light let into the lens.

23-08-2007, 11:58	#1
Tysonator Vodka Martini Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: ESSEX Posts: 874	Canon D-SLR Lens Review Hi, has any body got or used the following Lens Canon EF 70-300mm f 4-5-6 USM IS I have read a few reviews on the web and it is rated reasonbly well as a consumer lens. The next step up professional lens cost about £850 compared to £380 for the above lens. Cheers __________________ Will think of some witty to say, well when I think of it

23-08-2007, 21:06	#2
Dr. Z I'm going for a scuttle... Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,021	I had the non-IS version and have sampled both the IS and APO versions of this lens. All I will say is that you can pick up the 70-200 for similar money second hand and whilst you dont quite have the length of the 70-300 you have a massively better lens. The fact its F4 at 200mm kinda makes up for the lack of IS too, but then you might not have as steady hands as I do... You could also add in a 1.4 TC at a later date to give you the length and the quality for the same aperture as the one above, but all the while retaining the fantastic quality of the L series glass (or very, very close to it with the TC). EDIT: I sold my 70-200 to Pebbles and kinda regret it. I miss it every time I pick up my camera and it really felt like selling a kidney. My best shots came through that lens too __________________

24-08-2007, 14:56	#3
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	check out this site for reviews and sample pics http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

24-08-2007, 20:12	#4
Tysonator Vodka Martini Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: ESSEX Posts: 874	I have just purchased a Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro (Sigma AF) and it is a lovely lens, very crip natural images. As it has a filter ring og 72mm, making it a fast lens. I will be selling in a few months a Tamron 55-200mm f/4-5.6 Di II LD Macro (Canon AF). Again a very good lens __________________ Will think of some witty to say, well when I think of it

24-08-2007, 22:02	#5
Dr. Z I'm going for a scuttle... Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,021	Sorry to be an arse, but why do you think having a 72mm filter ring size makes the lens fast? Its got nowt to do with any of the factors that make a lens "fast" - be that autofocus or aperture. F/4.5 @ 70mm isnt all that fast either, really - although I'm sure I have read good things about it __________________

25-08-2007, 20:18	#7
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	by fast in lenses means low light performance, not fast focusing. F4.5 isn't that fast, F2.8 is fast. filter size has nothing to do with aperture. __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

25-08-2007, 21:33	#9
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	when you press the depth of field preview button you can see the aperture blades close up, it is that control the light. filter size doesn't affect the speed of the lens. __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

26-08-2007, 00:50	#10
petemc Moonshine Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Nr Liverpewl Posts: 4,371	I have a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 lens and a Canon 24-70 f/2.8 lens. The sigma filter size is 82mm and the Canon is 77mm. That means that the Sigma lens is bigger, nothing more. They both stop down to f/2.8 allowing the same amount of light through them. I have a Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens which is, I think, 52mm and yet allows more light through than the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 with its 82mm filter size. Its the aperture that determines the amount of light let into the lens. __________________ Thats no hamster, its a space station!