Help! New EF 70-300 L wobbles

[thekingb]

After a short affair with the EF 100-400 during which I was underwhelmed by its sharpness (maybe a bad copy?), the push/pull zoom and its old IS system, I decided to return it and get the new 70-300 L.


It arrived today. While my initial test shots are fantastic (including keepers at 300mm and 1/13s shutter indoors), the barrel that extends has a noticeable wobble. Not a major wobble, but noticeable. The few reviews out there praise the build quality and use terms like "tank" to describe it. But my tank wobbles a bit. Do I have another return in my future, or is this normal?


Thanks for your help.


Brian

[HDNitehawk]

I went to a canon workshop tonight and they had one there. I had been wanting to get my hands on one and this was my first opportunity. I ran it through it

[dsiegel5151]

I played with one at the camera store for 15 or 20 minutes. Didn

[neuroanatomist]

I'm sorry to hear that, Brian! No actual insights for you, but based on the reviews that are tricking out, it would seem you got a bad copy. Hopefully that's a really rare occurrence!


Personally, I'm still sort of considering this lens, even though I have the 70-200mm f/2.8<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L IS II and the 100-400mm. I plan on taking my 5DII on my upcoming trip (not the 7D) and the 70-200mm in addition to a few other lenses. I keep looking at the space the 70-200mm takes up in the bag, and wondering if I should get the new 70-300mm to bring instead. 200mm on FF just isn't that long. I have a feeling I'd use the telephoto zoom mostly outdoors, with sufficient light for the slow aperture not to be a problem. WIth the 70-300mm instead of the 70-200mm, I could probably squeeze in the 135mm f/2<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L as well. But then, I would also likely bring the 1.4x extender, which plays nice with the 70-200mm II. Hmmmmmm...

[HDNitehawk]

Personally, I'm still sort of considering this lens, even though I have the 70-200mm f/2.8<span style="COLOR: #ff0000"]L IS II and the 100-400mm.

All in all, I think all you gain is a lens that is a little more compact than those two. It sure felt nice last night, small, compact, sturdy, and lite. (I say lite my perspective of lite is probably a little bit warped after carrying the 500mm around so much).


Sure it has better IQ at 300mm than you would get with the 70-200mm with the 1.4...if that matters here is a suggestion...add another 3K and buy a 300mm F2.8L[:P]

[dsiegel5151]

Something that I noticed also at the camera shop was that both the Kenko Pro 300 1.4x and Promaster 300 1.4x teleconverters (they look like the exact same thing; I don

[piiooo]

Something that I noticed also at the camera shop was that both the Kenko Pro 300 1.4x and Promaster 300 1.4x teleconverters (they look like the exact same thing; I don't really know the difference between them besides the price) retained autofocus with the 70-300mm.

Did you check the entire range of the focal length? The 70-300's widest F-stops are 4.0 at 70mm and 5.6 closer to 300mm. How did the lens +TC autofocus at 300mm?

[dsiegel5151]

pilooo


Background info: I went to the camera store to compare the Kenko Pro 300 1.4x teleconverter that I purchased online with that of the Canon 1.4x II teleconverter. Autofocus on the 70-300 L (store copy) worked throughout the whole range on a 60D (store copy) + Kenko Pro 300 1.4x teleconverter. Obviously this was not true for the Canon 1.4x II teleconverter. I noticed that the store also had a Promaster 300 1.4x teleconverter for about $50 less than the Kenko I just bought. This thing looked exactly like my Kenko (I assume they are made by the same company), so I tried it out and it worked the same; e.g., autofocus worked throughout the whole zoom range of the lens (this was done in the store too, so lighting wasn

[HDNitehawk]

Did you check the entire range of the focal length? The 70-300's widest F-stops are 4.0 at 70mm and 5.6 closer to 300mm. How did the lens +TC autofocus at 300mm?

The new 70-300 L is not listed as being compatable with the new III series extender.


http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&amp;articleID=3508


I wonder why? And I wonder if it is compatable with the older ones. I am not sure I would want to use a third party extender if Canon's won't work with them. What if there is a strctural issue that would damage the lens?

[dsiegel5151]

HDNitehawk: Good question. I don't know how the third party could structurally damage the lens, but I guess it is possible. Unlike the Canon, the Kenko/Promaster/Tamron (all look identical) don't have an element that enters the back portion of the lens. I've played around with a lot of teleconverters on a lot of lenses and the Kenko and Promaster work on every lens I own. My first Kenko did not make a great union with the lens (wobbled a bit), so I sent it back and the second one fit just as snug as the Canon teleconverter with the lens and camera.