|
|
isaacw
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jul 3, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 292
|
|
Review Date: Mar 13, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $160.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
-FAST autofocus
-Compact design
-Good for the money
|
|
Cons:
|
-Not as solid feeling as a L lens (but it's not one, so there!)
|
|
Bought this as my first telephoto from a friend who upgraded to the 70-200mm f4L world. This lens has served me well for 4 years, and has been a GREAT motorsports lens. The fast AF is really nice when panning and tracking race cars and motorcycles. This is probably the best bang for the buck. I myself just upgraded to a 70-200mm f4L non-IS, but it took a while to convince myself. Here is my parting shot taken with my 100-300mm:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/isaac_eos/2699472817/
|
|
 Mar 13, 2009
|
|
stevej2001
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Oct 12, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 45
|
|
Review Date: Dec 4, 2008
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft, especially at the long end.
|
|
I bought this lens about 1990 for my Eos 650. It was ok given that I had very limited skills.
When I bought the original Digital Rebel (300D) I figured I could use this lens-- boy was I disappointed. The image quality was dismal.
So I bought an 70-200L4. What an eyeopener. Of course the L lens is much more expensive, but the difference between the two was incredible.
I will say the lens is pretty robust-- much better constructed than newer canon inexpensive lenses.
I still have mine-- I tried selling it but the bids were less than the cost of shipping.
|
|
|
Dec 4, 2008
|
|
chuborama
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 18, 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 70
|
|
Review Date: Jun 18, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, metal mount, Ring USM, full time manual
|
|
Cons:
|
zoom creep, soft when pushed to its limits (but that's why they're called limits...)
|
|
I was looking for a cheap, sturdy telephoto zoom to complement the 70-200 f2.8 I plan on getting this summer. I wanted something that I wouldn't mind throwing in the bag and maybe getting a little dinged or dented - field work, packing light on a hike, causal sporting events.
This lens didn't disappoint, especially at the price I got it for. I
I bought this lens used, in Japan, for JPY 9,000, or at the current exchange rate, $US83. There was no hood, box, or manual included.
I don't use hood anyways, nor read the manuals, and the box would just collect dust...so I got this at one hell of a price!
It's easy to use, and zooms very easily (too easily! It creeps alot when pointed down). What sold me though was the rear-focusing Ring USM - I'm into sports photography, particularly ultimate frisbee. I had tried the more expensive 70-300 IS but was disappointed with the AF speed, and found that more than being a little soft on the long end, many of my pictures were actually out of focus! (The lens couldn't keep up with the subjects, so I'd get nice clear backgrounds and out of focus subjects) While this lens gets soft at 300mm, you'd have to be peeping to not be pleased with the quality you get from 8x12 or A4 size prints. And AF is blazing fast - Canon's famous AF does not disappoint in the least.
For less than US$90, I got a lens I won't be afraid to take with me to messier, dirtier sporting events, with great color and bokeh and more importantly awesome AF. If you can get this at a good price, you won't regret it.
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2008
|
|
James Roberts
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 26, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 11
|
|
Review Date: Mar 14, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Great Value for Money if you can't quite afford 100-400, quiet AF,
|
|
Cons:
|
Tiny MF ring, Can be slow AF in dark conditions, gets very soft after f10
|
|
This lens has been a great companion for me during one season of motorsport photography, it has managed to get me through damp races even though it is not weather sealed and it's a trustworthy lens. Although it can accumlate dust very easily in the inner elements most of the images produced are at a high quality and is perfect for a rookie starting out at sports photography. It comes with a decent lens hood and helps to reduce some of glare caused in the bright light, it would of been a much better lens if they could of fitted IS onto it like the 75-300mm but it's a lightweight telephoto lens that is a great point about it. But after upgrading now to a 70-200mm L f2.8, the quality difference is by far noticable but is still capable of producing great images in the right hands. The tiny focus ring is a bit of a pain being behind the zoom push n pull system and would of worked better with it at the front. Good Lens, not to be missed.
|
|
|
Mar 14, 2008
|
|
dellis
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 11, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 12, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $190.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Quick and Quiet AF. Pretty sharp pictures when stopped down one f-stop. Great price
|
|
Cons:
|
Needs a lot of light, zoom will extend by itself when angled down, I don't take any important shots past ~150mm...it loses quality quickly after that.
|
|
This is a good lens for the money. It's probably unusual, however, I use this lens quite often for portraits. It's a little long for a portrait lens on a 1.6 crop, but I like the bokeh. As others have said, if you can't afford a L, get this lens. It's definitely a step up from the 75-300. Buy this lens instead.
|
|
|
Apr 12, 2007
|
|
emandavi
Online
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 15, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 626
|
|
Review Date: Apr 1, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $120.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
light. Inexpensive. Beautiful images once you've learned to use it.
|
|
Cons:
|
You can't overide AF, without switching to manual focus on the camera.
|
|
Because I've had this lens since 2003, and used it as my all-around lens, most of the best images I've ever created came from this lens. I think those who give it a bad review just haven't learned to work with the lens before giving up on it. As with ANY lens, you need to know its strong points, and its limitations (and all lenses have a strong point, and a limitation), and if you work within them, you will have awesome images.
see some of the recent images taken here:
http://www.efelarca.smugmug.com/gallery/2574601#P-1-15
If you don't have a zoom in this range, or if you can't afford the Canon 70-200 2.8 L IS, then you'll want this.
|
|
|
Apr 1, 2007
|
|
aladyforty
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 3, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 977
|
|
Review Date: Nov 11, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
lightweight reasonably sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
zoom creep
|
|
I have used this lens for many forms of photography and have no problems with it. Images a fairly sharp and Ive won quite a few competitions with photos I used this lens to take them with. Im often asked what lens Im using so I guess it can be compared to better lenses in the right conditions. Mine was secondhand off of Ebay and I think I got a good copy somehow.
here are a few quick snapshots with Ive taken with it, very little PP work apart from crops
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v176/aladyforty/
|
|
|
Nov 11, 2006
|
|
shutterbug guy
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 23
|
|
Review Date: Oct 17, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $279.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast focusing and sharp when stopped down to F8. Very handy lens and great value for the money.
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow aperture and no IS.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2006
|
|
Ross T.
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 14, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 185
|
|
Review Date: Oct 15, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Small...Lightweight...sharp...very fast autofocus!
|
|
Cons:
|
It's f/5.6...no IS.
|
|
It's a Great little lens for the money...Small...Lightweight...Sharp...Great Zoom Range. I use to be the LasVegas, Nevada Zoo photographer & had to shoot through alot of chain link fences...this was the lens I used much of the time. Would put this lens right up against the fence & shoot. Worked perfectly because the front element doesn't rotate during focusing.
This Lens is not the sharpest lens in the Canon line-up, but this is Still a Great little Lens...For a Great Price... Takes Excellent Pictures!!
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2006
|
|
irabkin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 10, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Sep 1, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $175.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent lens for the money, relatively sharp, non-rotating front element, USM, Buttery smooth bokeh.
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow lens, non IS
|
|
If your wallet can't handle an L telephoto, this is definately the way to go. As long as you're outdoors, this lens is plenty fast, although forget about using it indoors. If you're on a budget, and want to take stellar shots of people, birds, animals, etc... (Especially if you use a crop body, as I do), this lens is perfect.
|
|
|
Sep 1, 2006
|
|
shybull
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 18, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: May 16, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Hard to beat for the money. Very fast focusing and realitivley sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
No negatives I can think of
|
|
I too bought this lens back around 1990 when I bought my EOS 10S. I used it while the kids grew up and my son played ball. I have been very satisfied all those years. When I bought my DRebel I wasn't sure what to expect with it and I didn't use it at all. But we went to Disney Animal Kingdom recently and I rediscovered this lens. Very sharp and fast. I was thinking of replacing it with the 70-200 F4L but no need to spend the money.
|
|
|
May 16, 2006
|
|
hewcanon
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 26, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 6, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Decent build, fast and accurate AF, natural colours and contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
f5.6 @ 300mm
|
|
Good value for money .. Decent build, fast and accurate AF, natural colours and contrast, definitely better than the 75-300mm III USM lens in about everything
The quality of build and shots are identical to the 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM II, except for the higher f-stops. This makes it a superb lens in good weather and sunny days .. otherwise you would need to set a higher ISO to avoid the camera-shake .. and even on a tripod with a low ISO in dull weather the pictures are not superb .. This lens needs a lot of light to function, although I have to say that the fast acuurate focusing was not affected by grey dull weather, unlike it's cheaper siblings that tended to hunt a lot.
The USM FT-AF is another plus.
Please do not try to compare results to an f2.8 IS L-lens or to the 50mm f1.8 prime as you will be disappointed. The results are however very good under the ideal circumstances .. and I also produced some very sharp indoors pictures with a flash on a 20D.
|
|
|
May 6, 2006
|
|
|
