Discuss the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM Lens Review - Tell us what you think about the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM Lens.
Printable View
Discuss the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM Lens Review - Tell us what you think about the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM Lens.
..Now this seems to be a seriously sweet lens! Whatever has happened at Canons zoom lens design department? Both 70-200/2.8 IS II and this lens are quantum leaps in image quality.
Now I can
I rented this lens for the long weekend and was hoping I could spend a good couple days trying it out. However I only actually only got in a few hours.
I'm new to photography - so maybe take into consideration my inexperience- but I found this lens a bit awkward.
I currently have a Canon t2i with kit lens 18-55, a 55-250 and more recently purchased a 24-105mm f/4L IS, all 3 function in a similar manner in terms of focusing and zooming, and with the zoom ring closer to the body. When compared to my existing lenses, the focusing ring and zoom are reversed in position. I found myself continuously refocusing or zooming when I intended the other. As I still consider it lucky when I get a good shot, it was rather frustrating to loose a shot when my learned behavior from the other lenses kicked in.
With more time I suppose I could get used to it, however for me I was able to adapt to the push pull zoom on the 100-400 (rented previous weekend) much faster.
What I did like with the 70-300 was the relative small size.
I could fit it in my small camera bag (LowePro slingshot 100AW) with my 24-105 on the camera.
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-l...0/DSC05168.JPGhttps://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-V...0/DSC05172.JPG
When I rented the 100-400, I had to carry it in a separate case. Minor, as I know I will be needing a larger bag soon, but that is something to consider.
As for technical aspects of this lens I am not qualified to critique. So I will describe the lens in terms I would to another beginner photographer.
Testing conditions:
Trip to the Calgary Zoo, Crowded with temperature around freezing point. I was wearing mitts, which may affect useability of the lens, but they are the same mitts I wear at dog park when taking pictures and last week when trying the 100-400.
I left the IS on and for the most part in mode 1.
I had trouble getting the autofocus to do it's job. It spent much of the time seeking, I'm used to getting into focus much quicker with my 24-105 or even the 55-250. I turned off AF much of the time, but as mentioned before , with rings in swapped positions, I took many out of focus pictures.. or many pictures that looked ok in viewfinder and on the LCD screen, but when uploaded and on computer... not so good.
For me the 70-300 seemed like it's range would suit me better, I found that with the 100-400 I often wanted to swap lenses to get the animals as they got closer.
I can't explain it, in logical terms. BUT I had a lot more fun with the 100-400 than I did with the 70-300.
To be fair I will have to try the lens again as the Zoo was crowded and my companions were not as eager to sit and just watch the animals or watch me play with my camera. Where I was virtually alone for 2 hrs at the Edmonton Zoo the previous weekend.
As for price.. well I'm not really in market for this lens just yet, priced about the same new as a 100-400 so at this time if I was buying new it would loose to the 100-400.(the 100-400 also has 77mm filter threads same as my 24-105 so no new filters for me, 70-300 features 67mm)
The 100-400 includes a padded case, and the tripod mount. The 70-300 includes a bag, but no mount.
If looking used I found only one 70-300 for as much as new, and found 5 100-400 to look at 3-500 below new.
In review of my review, I don't think I added any new information on the lens.
But if you read this far I hope it helped somehow. Nothing special, but some Picturess with the lens at different focal lengths
(wasn't planning a review so focal lengths were not planned, all photos hand held non croped)
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-n...IMG_3929-1.jpg
EOS REBEL T2i, ISO 100, 1/160 sec, Aperture 5.6, Focal Length 300mm
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-w...0/IMG_4004.JPG
EOS REBEL T2i, ISO 100, 1/250 sec, Aperture 5.0, Focal Length 182mm
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-1...0/IMG_4051.jpg
EOS REBEL T2i, ISO 400, 1/60 sec, Aperture 4.5, Focal Length 120mm
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_...0/IMG_3931.JPG
EOS REBEL T2i, ISO 100, 1/4 sec, Aperture 5.6, Focal Length 70mm
and more Picasa link to pictures that day
It absolutely did, thanks Kombi.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kombi
Do you think with a little more time you would get used to the different zoom ring position enough to enjoy the lens?
Arnt
FWIW, the EF-S 17-55mm also has the ring positions reversed relative to the 24-105mm and other lenses, but it's the same positioning as on the 70-300 L. Persoanlly, I used to switch off between the 17-55mm and the 24-105mm pretty often, and I quickly got used to the difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kombi
Absolutely, I think I could get used to it, I only got to actually use the lens about 5hrs. It is a very nice lens. I am a novice, but truly appreciate the additional potential of either of these L series lenses compared to my existing zoom 55-250.Quote:
Originally Posted by ahab1372
Couple more points of note, I don't intend to ever be any more than a hobbyist, and take pictures for personal enjoyment and my family, as such my pictures don't need to be ultra crisp for print, just clean enough to show on a monitor. So if I do step up beyond renting for a weekend or two, value for my money will play into which lens I get. I think image quality is slightly better with the 70-300 vs the 100-400, but the 70-300 is not compatible with the teleconverters so maybe one more reason to look closer at the 100-400.
I haven't tried the lens again , so no new feedback, but another question.
the 70-300L is not compatible with Canon teleconverters.. but is there a third party 1.4 or 2.0 converter that people are using with this lens?
The Kenko TCs are physically compatible. The newer ones report aperture correctly, meaning no AF (except on pre-1D X 1-series bodies) With the older ones that don't report aperture, the camera will try to AF (and sometimes succeed, depending on the scene).