 |
|
|
rbussmann
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 11, 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 14, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast and accurate zoom, image quality, color rendition, built like a tank
|
|
Cons:
|
No tripod ring, does not accept Canon converters
|
|
|
One of my most frequently used outdoor lenses on rough expeditions. Built quality is outstanding - this lens is really tough. Nice zoom range. The missing tripod ring is annoying, given the price. Excellent for what it is supposed to do. Less good for city environments / people (we work a lot in markets), because it naturally is rather visible.
|
|
 Apr 14, 2013
|
|
PCKit
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Apr 30, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 353
|
|
Review Date: Dec 17, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
size, weight, fast and accurate focus.
|
|
Cons:
|
the focus and zoom design are backwards. Drives me crazy but I still love the lens. I just deal with it.
|
|
|
The combo of this with my 5DIII are great together. I have at least as many keepers with this lens as with my 70 200 II when shooting sports. It is actually my go to lens for Football unless I am shooting at night. I have had it a couple of months and with its fast and accurate focus and light weight it has become a favorite. This lens and my pancake make a great travel pair. I keep wishing they would redo the 100 400 and make it perform like this lens for the extra distance. It does not need great light to focus accurately. The first day I received it I shot a FB game on a very dull and dreary day and it nailed almost every shot in Servo. If it didn't get the shot it was me.
|
|
|
Dec 17, 2012
|
|
edseiz
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Mar 13, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 165
|
|
Review Date: Apr 26, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Compact, sharp and very fast focusing.
|
|
Cons:
|
No tripod ring included and needs to accept teleconverter.
|
|
|
I just bought this lens used due to the fact that I may want to sell my 70-200mm f2.8 IS version I. The verdict is still out. I am going to test it tomorrow but just playing with it and seeing the color and how fast it focuses. I am impressed. If you are considering it, go for it, you won't regret it.
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2012
|
|
irispatch
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 3, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 111
|
|
Review Date: Apr 15, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, focus speed IS , size.
|
|
Cons:
|
Price focus and zoom rings are reversed.
|
|
|
When my 35-350L broke I took a long time trying to decide what to replace it with. The 28-300 is a nice range, a heavy expensive beast. The 100-400 is a popular lens that I have rented twice and both times not really satisfied with the results. I had a 70-300 DO which was nice but not quite sharp enough and for a bout the same price the 70-300 L turns out to be good enough for me to give up my 300F4LIS. A solid performer that has given me sharp handheld shots that usually I would need a tripod to get. finding one on the used market tells you a lot, they just cannot be found used.
|
|
|
Apr 15, 2012
|
|
iclaudius
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 31, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 8
|
|
Review Date: Apr 12, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,440.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Compact size, build, IS is amazing, image quality, minimum focusing distance
|
|
Cons:
|
no tc
|
|
|
I have had the lens since new for about 7 months. Especially useful for travel photography because it packs down so well into small space. This cannot be overemphasized.
Image quality is beyond reproach and helped greatly by new IS system. Also own 100-400, but when exta reach not needed, would opt for this, especially for travel. Same reason I have no desire to own 70-200L 2.8 IS despite its great image quality.
For those worried about speed of lens, it is mainly an outdoor lens, but even so, just for kicks, i have obtained some terrific stage shots at concerts at higher iso's (2500) with the 5dII when too far away to use my 135L. The IS is so good that you can capture some real keepers.
The excellent minimum focusing distance, floating lens, and IS makes for a real treat in close up photos with or without a tripod.
All in all, am finding this to be a favorite lens.
|
|
|
Apr 12, 2012
|
|
John57
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 14, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 50
|
|
Review Date: Apr 9, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, focus.
|
|
Cons:
|
Zoom ring the opposite way to what I expected. Cost.
|
|
|
I bought this lens when it was still rather expensive .... but don't regret it as it is so good. Some people wondered where it would sit in Canon's line up but I thought it was just what I wanted for my 5D II ... and I was right.
I use it for weddings and general photography and find it is not too slow in any way for the use I put it to.
The images are the sharpest I have seen from a zoom of this kind except the 70-200 f2.8L. The focus speed is good and the lens though heavy balances better on my 5D than the 70-200. The IS is great though takes a second or so to click in like most IS systems.
It is built like most big L lenses ... like a tank ... but feels OK.
The biggest issue I have with the lens is personal preference really - in that I love the twist zoom style like the 70-200 as opposed to the push pull of a 100-400. The problem is on this lens that the zoom ring is at the front of the barrel - the opposite way round to the 70-200 and I find it ungainly to use .. This is, however, a minor issue for what I consider to be a stunning lens and one I would highly recommend !
|
|
|
Apr 9, 2012
|
|
jackbreakfast
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 1, 2012
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 1, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, weight, versatility, sharpness, color rendition, IQ
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
I was spending much of my time waffling between this lens and the 100-400 and in the end I was swayed by this lens' size and weight and newer IS. I'm delighted with the lens' sharpness and color rendition. The optics are very spiffy indeed, and the pictures are SHARP O YES THEY ARE VERY NICE AND SHARP at 300mm, f5.6...a versatile and handholdable lens, to be sure. My primary interest is bird photography, and I would love the extra 100mm provided by the 100-400 but I also heard about a lot of soft-at-400 copies of the 100-400. Who knows if that's true or not? Anyhow, I use this little white zoomer constantly and I've been very pleased with the results thus far. I'll also tell you that it feels very good in the hands and is very well-balanced on the 7D. Last: The AF is surprisingly swift for a zoom lens!
|
|
|
Apr 1, 2012
|
|
Nektario K
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 5, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 243
|
|
Review Date: Mar 27, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very light weight for such a zoom, IQ very good, and fast focus.
|
|
Cons:
|
Ridiculous positoning of focus and zoom rings -they just should have kept it as normal - ie: 70-200 and almost every other lens.
|
|
|
This lens came today.. I love how light weight it is.. I had read about the focus ring being closer to the body and the zoom ring being away..in other words, the opposite set up from 24-105 24-70, 70-200 and probably every other lens.. Why on earth ..but why...why would some engineer design the zoom ring all the way down there..How the heck are you suppose to zoom in a steady supported motion if you have to have your hand a football field away from the camera body..
I'm giving it a week and its going back strictly due to this set up they made.. Completely ridiculous.. If you plop this lens on a tripod.. and don't care..then its fine I guess.. (Oh ya.. no tripod collar, but that didn't bother me as much)..so you'll be ok with it on a tripod.. but any freestyle, pj wedding work..its going to be a pain...
I give it a week...did I say how ridiculous a design this focus ring & zoom ring is?
|
|
|
Mar 27, 2012
|
|
sbay
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 10, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 50
|
|
Review Date: Dec 28, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
image sharpness, build quality, compact size
|
|
Cons:
|
price
|
|
I've been searching for a good tele-zoom to use in my travel photography and finally decided on the 70-300 L lens. This lens exceeded my expectations and is extremely sharp with IS that works very well. Before I got this lens, I used either the 70-200 f/4 L IS or the older 70-300 IS (non L) lens. However, the 70-200 always seemed to be too short and the older 70-300 had very poor image quality.
When I got the 70-300 L, I tested it thoroughly and my hope was that it would be close in sharpness to the 70-200 f/4 L which has received very good reviews. I was surprised to find that on a full-frame camera (5DII) that the 70-300L was actually superior to the 70-200 f/4: in the center their sharpness was similar but the 70-300L had much better corner performance. You can see 100% crops from the lens at http://bayimages.net/blog/reviews/canon-70-300mm-l-lens-review/
There is some chromatic aberration at 70mm (red fringing) and 300mm (blue fringing). For me, this is a relatively minor issue as it can be corrected easily in software.
Unfortunately the lens doesn't come with a tripod collar which would help improve stability for tripod mounted shots. Canon sells this separately for nearly $200, which seems outrageously expensive for item that should have been included.
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2011
|
|
jonbrach
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Dec 22, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 896
|
|
Review Date: Dec 4, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
outstanding IQ,quick AF,light,relatively small,great build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
price,focus ring arrangement
|
|
|
I have been on the fence concerning this lens for some time but I finally decided to take the plunge when I got the chance to buy a second hand copy.I must say i am very impressed.The lens fits a niche for me,a long range telephoto lens that is not only sharp and quick to focus but also extremely easy to carry around due to its size and weight......a winner !
|
|
|
Dec 4, 2011
|
|
Daniel Yee
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 3, 2009
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 23, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
very good range, very sharp wide open, very effective IS
|
|
Cons:
|
none, although constant f/4 will be nice
|
|
|
Was hesitating between 70-200L f/4 IS and 70-300L. Got this baby instead of the 70-200 because:
- longer reach
- I need a decent telephoto to compliment my landscape needs
- don't mind the slow aperture
on my 1D3 this lens is really really sharp on all focal lengths. I don't find the price expensive a this lens has better built than the 70-200 f/4. The only thing I find it expensive is the tripod ring... which I got it as well.
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2011
|
|
yank74
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 22, 2011
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 22, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, weight, IS, sharpness, weather sealing
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
Have this lense now for 4 months.....
Before I owned a 70-200 L IS f4 and a 100-400 L IS for few years... After couple of weeks i was ending to seel both and keep only this pearl. it is fast and sharpe as 70-200,and with 1.4x kenko pro300 easily cover the range of 100-400(with working AF on 5D) Highly recommend this lens
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2011
|
|
dnauer
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 22, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 9
|
|
Review Date: Oct 21, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,499.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
IQ, Focus speed, IS, Size
|
|
Cons:
|
Have to use non-canon teleconverter
|
|
|
Bought this spring during the rebate program, it is one of two lenses usually found on my camera. Love the lens for its size, sharp images, lightening fast focus. Tried a Kenko Pro 300 DGX and wasn't satisified with resulting IQ and focus speed was not good even in mid-day sun. This lens is a great one to carry and expect excellent results from -- I consider it one of my best lens purchases even at the price it goes for. I used the consumer 70-300 IS for several months before buying this and consider the L to be a considerable upgrade in th important factors of color, contrast, sharpness, focus speed, and that increidble IS.
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2011
|
|
Kris Reiswig
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jan 13, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 589
|
|
Review Date: Oct 20, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, weight, IS upgrade, color rendition, weatherproof
|
|
Cons:
|
Have to buy a 3rd party lens colar
|
|
|
I bought this lens specifically for a 3 week trip to Iceland. I used it all summer in preparation. Wow, is this lens ever a dandy, especially for landscape photography. It was so easy to open up to F11 and beyond, even with handholding, due to the IS. The colors that this lens produces are fabulous. It will not replace my 100-400 as my main wildlife lens, but when I want to travel light, this lens and a T3i body are perfect companions. Only con was tracking down a lens collar.
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2011
|
|
Aichbus
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 22, 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 6, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharpness, build quality, size
|
|
Cons:
|
distorsion, ca
|
|
|
When I bought this lens, I already owned the 4/70-200, 2.8/70-200 (I) and the 100-400. So I can compard the lens to those three. Apart from the different focal lengths, its overall IQ is on par or better than these. I tested two copies and they were identical. What is annoying however is the rather strong distorsion. Even for a zoom lens. The 100-400 performs betten in this regard. While this is not important for most people, for me it is. Architecture is a no go with this lens if you want to have the maximal image quality. Sure you can correct the distorsion, but you will notice the loss in IQ. The distorsion is so strong that you will have problems when stitching images together. Under the same conditions, I had no problems with the 100-400. But apart from that, the lens is wonderful.
|
|
|
Oct 6, 2011
|
|
John Daniel
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Jun 6, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1268
|
|
Review Date: Sep 25, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,600.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, fast, IQ, compact, weather/dust proof, light
|
|
Cons:
|
No tripod collar...c'mon Canon ...
|
|
|
This lens is surprising. I consider it the replacement for the 100-400; but the relationship stops right there. I first tried this lens in store on a 7D and I was stunt by the focus speed.
The lens is sharp wide open. I have done shots of birds wide open at 300mm and I was very surprise of the results with the sharpness of the lens; even on very much cropped shots.
My regrets goes to the absence of collar; not even accessible on the market yet and the fact that Canon played it safe by designing the lens without the possibility of adding an extender. Although I have purchased a kenko pro to use with it and the results are very good.
All in all, an excellent lens for traveling light.
|
|
|
Sep 25, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
69
|
105032
|
Apr 14, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
93% of reviewers
|
$1,497.00
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.73
|
8.26
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
