Hey,
Which of these is essentially the 'better' lens - in general, for the most situations?
Printable View
Hey,
Which of these is essentially the 'better' lens - in general, for the most situations?
If you need 400mm, the 100-400mm is better. Otherwise, the 70-300mm is optically superior, has better IS, weather sealing, and is smaller and lighter.
Ditto, so long as you mean 70-300L.Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
Yep L
is the 70-300mm compatible with any teleconverters? even though Canon officially says it isn't.
The 70-300 does work with some extenders, not Canon, but if you are considering that already, than the 70-300 is not for you. As a very portable, extremely usable high IQ zoom the 70-300L is perfect for me. The compact size and the high IQ mean you can use it for street shots like this;
[img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7149/6...14b2aaac_z.jpg
United we stand by Steve's Life, on Flickr[/img]
Or landscpae shots like this;
[img]http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6147/5...493a79ec_z.jpg
Sunset_2 by Steve's Life, on Flickr[/img]
But if you need 400, than buy a 400.
If you don't need something now, there is a good chance that the 100-400 will be replaced this year, most likely second half (Source Canon Rumours).
I went for the 70-300L for all the reasons listed above. I would add one more plus for the 70-300L, the new lens coating that resists dirt and marks. After 4 months of tropical & temperate rainforest, tropical islands and snow in Antarctica; you only need to use a blower and brush. I have never seen water marks on the front element and have never needed to use a microfiber cloth.
Nah. That was just the Canon patent they showed on CR. Doesn't necessarily mean that it will be this year, or that it will even go into production. My guess is that large corporations like that patent everything that R&D comes up with. We DO know that they're at least working on a replacement. CR is wrong on dates, a lot. He just passes on rumours he hears.