I'm on the search for a goodish, smallish 70-200 or 300 zoom for travelling and when I don't want to lug around my 70-200 2.8L, which is the only long lens I have.
One or two of the Canon 70-300's are quite good I've heard but I don't know which ones, can someone give me some opinions? IS would be nice but not essential
the 70-300 is is a good choice . I dont think any of the other consumer >300's are worth looking at. the 100-300 usm (non L) is not bad and has ring usm and focuses very quick but the IQ of the 70-300 is is much better. The DO is probably not worth the extra cash but is smaller. if you want cheaper then maybe look at the Sigma 70-300 APO which is not too bad and very good value.
Or what about the 70-200 f4 L which is not that much bigger than the consumer 70-300's and will give better IQ than the rest.
There are two or three Canon versions of the 75-300, one has IS. The lens you want/will be the happiest with, is the 70-300 with IS that was released in 2005. It's a great travel lens, and cheap enough you will be able to afford more vacation vs buying one of the L lenses with IS. The 70-200 f4L is an awesome lens, but not at night. You will appreciate the IS when things get a little dark.
75-300 4-5.6 III
75-300 4-5.6 III USM
70-300 4-5.6 IS USM (Micro USM)
70-300 DO 4-5.6 USM (Ring USM)
100-300 4.5-5.6 USM (Ring USM)
I have the 70-300 IS and think its a good lens to have in the bag when traveling light. I had the 100-300 and its not bad but just not as good as the 70-300
75-300 4-5.6 III
75-300 4-5.6 III USM
70-300 4-5.6 IS USM (Micro USM)
70-300 DO 4-5.6 USM (Ring USM)
100-300 4.5-5.6 USM (Ring USM)
I have the 70-300 IS and think its a good lens to have in the bag when traveling light. I had the 100-300 and its not bad but just not as good as the 70-300
Thanks, just bought one new on UK ebay for £310 inc shipping (in the UK), seems like a good lens and what I'm looking for.
I adore my 70-200 2.8L but it's heavy and conspicuous and not right for lighweight travelling.
sperraglia wrote:
I love my 70-200 f4 is so much that I am selling my 2.8 is. Nice, light and sharp.
I did consider the 70-200 F4 as I know it's a superb lens, but I already have the 2.8L version and didn't really want another white lens. I also wanted a bit more reach too and not to have worry too much about it on holiday.
The 75-300 seems just right, now I just have to hope it arrives
dhphoto wrote:
I did consider the 70-200 F4 as I know it's a superb lens, but I already have the 2.8L version and didn't really want another white lens.
I knew you liked your 70-200 2.8 and see that you are not looking to replace it.
the weight and price difference between the f2.8 and f4 70-200L makes having both reasonable in my book. You can easily carry the f4L around all day even if it is larger and a bit heavier than the 70-300 4-5.6 IS... I wouldn't write if off as an option.
Pancrazio wrote:
How is the focusing on the 70-300 is? Can it be used for outdoor sports?
Haven't tried it yet, but it seems the body is very important for focus speed and on my 1D2N it focuses very fast. I think it would probably do fine - although we are talking 'budget' telephoto here.
Has anyone compare the 70-300 IS with Tammy 28-300 VC IQ wise? It would be interesting to know as I might opt for the Tammy when come to light travelling if it is as good as the IS.
Ron Hew wrote:
I might opt for the 28-300 Tammy when come to light travelling if it is as good as the 70-300 IS.
Yes, you and about 4 million other photographers would. Unfortunately, there's no free lunch, and no 28-300 is going to equal the IQ of Canon's 70-300 IS for a looong time, if ever.
Ron Hew wrote:
By the way, do you have any experience on either one?
I own the 70-300 non-DO and am very impressed with it (on center it matches my 70-200/2.8IS and it's better than my 70-200/4 non-IS), but I haven't used the Tamron 28-300 or read any non-magazine tests that would encourage me to do so. At FM reviews, for example, the 70-300 scores an 8.8 average while the Tamron 28-300 (is it an older one?) has a 6.9 (which by FM-review standards is pretty low).
I suspect that if you told most FMers they had to make a blind guess at which has better IQ between a $600 70-300 from Canon and a cheaper 28-300 from a third-party mfr., it wouldn't be close.
But again, we're all waiting for the day when a 28-300 proves us wrong!
Pancrazio wrote:
How is the focusing on the 70-300 is? Can it be used for outdoor sports?
The 70-300 IS has the micro usm moter, not ring usm. As such, it is significantly slower to focus than those with the ring usm (eg: 70-200). I don't think the pro cameras would speed it up much.
By the way, do you have any experience on either one?