Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

Archive 2015 · Three 70-300s: which one?

saintiwari
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Three 70-300s: which one?

1. 70D+70-300 L
2. Nikon V3+70-300 CX
3. Sony A7r II+ 70-300 G SSM II

Do you guys have any experience with these?

A bit of explaining: I have pre-ordered A7rii so that's a given. For wildlife, i can buy the new ssm II version of A mount 70-300. Or i can maintain a seperate set up with Canon, eg, Option 1. Or a 1 Nikon system with Nikon CX version of 70-300.

Notice that all above lenses are full frame equivalent 70-300s, but reach varies because of the bodies. So Canon becomes 100-480. Sony, 100-450. Nikon: 190-810mm !

All 3 lenses are acclaimed, IQ wise they should be on par?? Sony's SSM II version is new, an autofocus update to their plain version, but optics should be same, as in, good.

The lens will be used for landscapes, mammals and not so much birds basically.

I have been thinking about it for some time now, and having ordered A7rii, now is the time to decide

I even thought of 55-250 STM at one point, oweing to its light weight and great reviews. Not so sure now.

Thanks for replying, i posted this here because, well, telephotos = canon

Jul 25, 2015 at 01:59 PM

Kathy White
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Three 70-300s: which one?

I have the 55 250 STM and it's ok. It doesn't compare to the 70 300L which I also have. Even with multiple lenses in overlapping focal lengths, I can't seem to let it go. The other lenses you are referring to, I have no knowledge of. I am going to be looking at the A7r as prices prices drop as well as the new Canon bodies, but will still shoot my Canon glass even if I were to go for the Sony.

Jul 25, 2015 at 03:07 PM

Ian.Dobinson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Three 70-300s: which one?

none of you choices offers the same .

the v1 system has easily the smallest sensor . while the A7 is a FF .

it matters more the whole complete system your using .

but just the lens alone the 70-300L is the best 70-300 out there

Jul 25, 2015 at 03:10 PM

arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Three 70-300s: which one?

For just mammals and landscapes, I'd get the sony. No need for all the reach unless you are doing birds. 300 on FF may be a bit short for some mammals but I guess you know your own shooting situations better than us so if 300 is enough then I'd just stick with the Sony. Or maybe since Canon glass is reported to be so good at AF with Metabones on the A7RII you could get like a Canon 100-400 to gain that extra 100mm and use it on the A7RII with adapter.

Jul 25, 2015 at 04:11 PM

johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Three 70-300s: which one?

If the optics on the Sony haven't changed, then you'd want to avoid that one- it's an expensive consumer-grade zoom, not in the same class as the Canon L (which is really in it's own class).

Jul 25, 2015 at 06:07 PM

JVthePT
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Three 70-300s: which one?

I have used the 70d with the 70-300L and it's an outstanding combo.

Jul 26, 2015 at 07:20 AM

arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Three 70-300s: which one?

If John is correct and the Sony 70-300 is more a basic quality lens, then I'd go for the Canon 70-300 or 100-400 on the A7RII unless you want to shoot birds and then having the 70D would be ideal with either of those lenses.

Jul 26, 2015 at 07:29 AM

saintiwari
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Three 70-300s: which one?

With 100-400, 7DII will be ideal because of extender compatibility. But right niw too many unhappy people. 70D looks like safer bet.
Sony because they make adapters for A mount lenses. Photozone review of that lens was good.

The difference for me between 70-300L and 100-400L is basically size and weight. But those are on paper, not sure how much difference it makes in real life.

70-300L should be good for crop body as i get 480mm. But 100-400 begs for a full frame camera.

I suspect most of 70-300L owners will be torn post 100-400ii introduction. And many 100-400ii buyers will be thinking about the weight savings that come with 70-300L.

Jul 26, 2015 at 08:47 AM

OntheRez
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Three 70-300s: which one?

I can't comment on all three lenses and cameras as my only experience is with Canon products. The 70-300 f/4.0-5.6L is an excellent lens. It works very well on my partner's 60D, and she likes the lighter weight and the fact that it balances well. I've also shot it on both my 5DIII and on my 1Dx. I did most of the past softball/baseball season with this combination and was quite pleased with the results. I also did a lot of wildlife and even some landscape with it. Focus acquisition is (no surprise) not as good as the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS ver. II which is perhaps the best around. It's also not as good as my old 300mm f/4.0L non-IS which is surprisingly quick and has excellent clarity. If one can live with a prime, it is a Canon best buy.

I finally ponied up the cash for the 100-400mm f/4.5 - 5.6L ver. II at the end of the ball season. I really wanted to be able to catch the play in deep center field without extreme cropping. To put it mildly, the 100-400 has been a disappointment. I'm aware that many love it, but in my case, it is completely unpredictable as to when and where the AF will focus. I've sent it to Canon who blew me off even though I provided outstanding examples of the focus point clearly centered on the subject while the lens focused on something at the extreme edge of the frame and 100' closer. In fact even holding steady on a pitcher before he/she begins the windup, I can see the focus "winking" in and out even though I'm fixed. I've tried every trick and setting I can find without much change.

It does work better with wildlife mostly because I don't have to rapidly move to an action point and try to acquire AF. With most birds and animals, one starts with them at a spot and then try to move with them as they go. Motion is almost always linear. I still get some annoying OOF shots, but slower, more predictable motion seems to be within its capacity.

I don't know what changes were made between the 60D and the 70D but I can't imagine you won't get similar results.

Oh, I did at one time handle the Sony lens you reference and while I didn't shoot with it, build quality was well below Canon L and I presume Nikon also.

Robert

Jul 26, 2015 at 09:37 AM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Three 70-300s: which one?

I haven't used any of those but based on lens tests I've read and a lens or two (or 3) I've owned or tried, 70-300 lenses tend to be REALLY good to 200mm, but then go downhill, and aren't that good at 300.

So I would recommend trying to figure out which lenses, if any, are an exception to this. I think the 70-300 Canon probably is, not sure about the others.

As an example, my Tamron 75-300 actually seemed sharper in the center, at f/5.6, than my 180 Tamron at f/5. Contrast was higher on the 180 though.

But at 300mm, both that and the old 100-300 L were borderline usable.

Jul 26, 2015 at 10:43 AM

johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Three 70-300s: which one?

AmbientMike wrote:
I haven't used any of those but based on lens tests I've read and a lens or two (or 3) I've owned or tried, 70-300 lenses tend to be REALLY good to 200mm, but then go downhill, and aren't that good at 300.

That's every one except the Canon L, and possibly very good copies of the latest Tamron (no tests can confirm that one, but some have proven their claim...). AF and VC on the Tamron, along with build quality and handling, will be what one'd expect given the price disparity though.

Jul 26, 2015 at 02:20 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Three 70-300s: which one?

johnctharp wrote:
That's every one except the Canon L, and possibly very good copies of the latest Tamron (no tests can confirm that one, but some have proven their claim...). AF and VC on the Tamron, along with build quality and handling, will be what one'd expect given the price disparity though.

Yeah, I didn't think that they had become common, but was conservative in my comments in case the later ones had been improved.

I had either the 572D or 672D, which KEH marked as not working with digital.

I like to think of xx-300 zooms as really good 70-200 zooms that have 300mm if you want or need it. I used to read Pop Photo a lot, and it seemed like every time they tested an xx-300, it did well up to 200, then 300 was good, but not great, at best, with some really poor ones at 300mm.

One that did well was my old 75-300 APO Sigma (non 1:2.) But the rubber covering disintegrated to goo, and even if you could find one, I doubt it would work properly on digital.

The Tamron 60-300 is good at 300mm if mf is ok. It's pretty heavy, though. Just barely beat a refurbished 70-300 IS at 300mm, I tried, which photozone.de said was the best Canon lens in this class at 300 at the time.

Bob Atkins said he got 80 lp/mm at the wide end of the 75-300 Canon, really great, but one of his 300mm shots didn't look sharp.

But yeah, mostly I don't think these are that good at 300. You might look at the 100-400, for the extra reach, as well.

Really like the 70-300 range, though.

Jul 26, 2015 at 05:41 PM

Imagemaster
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Three 70-300s: which one?

Canon 70-300L & 100-400 II not sharp at full-focal length?

Jul 26, 2015 at 06:08 PM

dhachey
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Three 70-300s: which one?

None of them. I strongly recommend the new Canon 100-400mm v2. Longer reach, better optics, moden design and great IS. The difference between 70mm and 100mm isn't enough to matter, but the extra 100mm on the long end will be most useful. Not sure how it will perform on the A7rii, it's too new to tell.

Jul 27, 2015 at 10:10 AM

saintiwari
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Three 70-300s: which one?

70 to 100 not much different, but on 70D, it becomes 160mm at the short end.

dhachey wrote:
None of them. I strongly recommend the new Canon 100-400mm v2. Longer reach, better optics, moden design and great IS. The difference between 70mm and 100mm isn't enough to matter, but the extra 100mm on the long end will be most useful. Not sure how it will perform on the A7rii, it's too new to tell.

Jul 27, 2015 at 11:37 AM

dhachey
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Three 70-300s: which one?

True, but no single lens will satisfy all needs. If you don't shoot wildlife, then a 70-200 (or 300) may be fine. I usually recommend going long and wide (both tele's) and fast (24-50mm f/1.4 primes). Outside of this recommendation you start to get into specialized territory. Now is a great time to be a photographer, so many choices for great optics and cameras.

Cheers, ...Dave

saintiwari wrote:
70 to 100 not much different, but on 70D, it becomes 160mm at the short end.

Jul 27, 2015 at 12:35 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Three 70-300s: which one?

Have you looked at the DO 70-300? Might be worth a look if weight is a concern. I haven't tried it, though

Jul 27, 2015 at 07:49 PM

dhachey
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Three 70-300s: which one?

I tried one once, but I wasn't blown away by it. Now that Canon has solved the problem with poor microcontrast and resolution with the second generation DO optics I'd wait for a refresh. It might be a long wait though, I suspect they will develop long tele's before another 70-300 DO lens.

AmbientMike wrote:
Have you looked at the DO 70-300? Might be worth a look if weight is a concern. I haven't tried it, though

Jul 27, 2015 at 08:33 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Three 70-300s: which one?

I read a lackluster review of the DO after posting

Jul 27, 2015 at 08:49 PM

Imagemaster
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Three 70-300s: which one?

AmbientMike wrote:
I read a lackluster review of the DO after posting

You could have read 108 owners' reviews right on this site:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/218/sort/7/cat/27/page/2

Jul 27, 2015 at 10:14 PM


FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.