|
|
victoriae
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 13, 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 13, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Not to big or heavy, very sharp, hand holdable for most shots, macro, reasonable price
|
|
Cons:
|
IS a little noisey but is not a problem
|
|
Hi my first post, This is one of my best lenses and i have quite a lot of L glass, works well with the 1.4x converter. I was able to hand hold this with the 1.4x converter and on a 50D.
I also use this with my 1D MK iii for motorsport and gives superb results.
I think all things considered this is a very good lens and one i shall keep.
|
|
 Sep 13, 2009
|
|
tonyat
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 23, 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 9, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,150.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Affordable for a long L lens. IS and Ring USM. Good Build Quality. Great in the sharpness, contrast and color departments.
|
|
Cons:
|
None from my point of view.
|
|
I was using a Tamron 70-300 was just not satisfied with it. I decided I needed better image quality and IS. I did like the 300mm focal length on a crop body, though. Was considering Canon's 70-300 with IS, but after a lot of research went with this lens and really do like it.
Colors and image sharpness just knock me dead compared with what I had before. The IS has increased my keeper rate dramatically. The Ring USM focusing is a great improvement. I am not a pro, but I still appreciate the build quality even if it is a little heavier.
|
|
|
Sep 9, 2009
|
|
Eggyj
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 5, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 53
|
|
Review Date: Jul 2, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $800.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid performance. Sharp, decent bokeh, portable, and flexible. Excellent close focus (1.5m). Built in hood. IS works fine. Good value. Good coatings, relatively light weight
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
A well balanced design. Close focus (not sure what previous reviewer was talking about at 6m ??) is a BIG advantage over prior 300mm design and 400 mm f5.6. Extremely flexible with 1.4x TC and ext. tubes or 500D. Provides very close focus 420 IS f5.6 with decent image quality, although rougher bokeh, and slower focus. IS could use a minor update but I've never had it let me down and I don't find the IS on my newer 70-300mm to be that much more effective - they both work. If you're shooting sunsets or distant scenics the old design with fewer lens elements might be better (better contrast less ghosting) but for field work with small critters and low light this lens is vastly superior.
One of the few reasons I still stick with Canon. I would love to see the same make-over of the 400 f5.6 (new gen IS, fast focus, and close focus <= 1.5m).
|
|
|
Jul 2, 2009
|
|
Janika
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 17, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 367
|
|
Review Date: Jun 30, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Easy to carry and handle, Relatively sharp, fast AF, Excellent for taking in-flight shots. Stabilizer works well for still objects, decent price-tag, Built in hood. Short min focusing distance, decent macro abilities.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not as sharp as it's predecessor, as it has more elements/glass, and a TC will make it worst.
|
|
Had this lens for almost 4-months and I liked it, but You have to be lucky to get a sharp copy, which is a shame from Canon L series product. I recommend it for runway shoots, motor-sports, or winter sports. Way too short for birding / wildlife and a TC will slow your USM down. I sold mine this week and getting a 400mm prime instead.
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2009
|
|
canonet
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 9, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 931
|
|
Review Date: Jun 12, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
|
|
Pros:
|
SHARP-SHARP lens! Beautiful colors
|
|
Cons:
|
Still an F4 and needs a longer minimal focus distance choice like 6 meters.
|
|
I bought this lens 2 years ago to use for football and has returned fabulous images and prefer to use this more than my 70-200 2.8L lens! The IS will let me use it down to 1/160 sec (reliably) and 1/125( if necessary) handheld. if you must have a telephoto prime and cannot afford a 300 2.8L, get this one and you will not be dissapointed.
The only downside is in many lowlight situations where you need the shutter speed, the F4 is fast enough. Also, needs a longer minimal focusing distance choice; 6 meters.
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2009
|
|
supershot
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 30, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 9, 2009
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
sorry I made a mistake ,I tryed a used one before which was damaged ,after trying a new one , I am very impressed,very sharp and good color I give it a 10 !!
|
|
Cons:
|
non what so ever
|
|
I rate this lens a 10
|
|
|
Mar 9, 2009
|
|
supershot
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 30, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 6, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 6, 2009
|
|
irispatch
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 3, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 61
|
|
Review Date: Mar 6, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $850.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, weight, image quality, versatility Telephoto to close up in one lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
Size packs easily in a carry on or my vest. Weight, light enough to hand hold and carry all day. Image quality is outstanding. After Renting a 100-400 twice and finding them lacking in sharpness and versatility I researched lenses for 6 months looking for something to photograph birds with that was withing my budget. The 300mm f4L kept coming up as a very good wildlife option for a crop camera. Since I like to photograph birds , flowers and insects this lens is ideal for me. The 400mm lacks IS and does not have the ability to perform as a close-up lens too. After a week in Florida I am very happy with the results, razor sharp images, with great color. I may just let the 70-200 F4IS go since this spends as much time on the camera as my 100 F2.8.
|
|
|
Mar 6, 2009
|
|
Barry Tucker
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 20, 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 20, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp and bright on my Canon 50D.
My copy is sharp, weight is comforting and perfect for wildlife.
I take pride in ownership of this very beautiful lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
This really is a nice lens, but keep in mind it is a 300mm prime.
I own 2 "L" lenses, and the quality is outstanding on both my L glass lenses.
For me it was worth the money, I love this lens.
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2009
|
|
HMZRHS
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 10, 2007
Location: Brunei
Posts: 62
|
|
|
Jan 8, 2009
|
|
KKFung
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 20, 2008
Location: China
Posts: 548
|
|
Review Date: Dec 28, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,070.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Small and light weight Tele, good focal length for both sport, protrait and wild life. Very good fit for travel
|
|
Cons:
|
No cons due to it is the cheapest white prime
|
|
Just bought a new one and tried protrait, sport and wild live, it is a all purpose tele in FF application
Excellent IQ and handling. I found it is just beyond the size limit for travel, any lens bigger than this size you will find trouble during walk and shoot.
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2008
|
|
primalcarl
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 26, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 20
|
|
Review Date: Dec 26, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent IQ, pretty light, IS, built in hood
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
I love this lens. I've gone through all variations of the 70-200, but always found myself wanting more reach as I visit zoo's a lot. I wasn't 100% satisfied with the image quality when using a 1.4x tc with a 70-200. I switched to a 100-400 and whilst the range was very good, I was very disappointed with the quality of images. They weren't as sharp or colourful as I was used to from L lenses.
I then made the decision to go for a 300mm F4 IS, and so far I'm very happy. Image quality is the most important factor for me, and this lens really delivers. Sharpness is excellent, and so is colour and bokeh. As the image quality of this lens is so good, you can crop images quite heavily without a significant reduction in quality (I have a 40D).
The only downside with this lens is the subject may be too close to you in certain situations, but that's not a fault with the lens just a question of choosing the right kit to take with you
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2008
|
|
|
