This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 201070-300 IS L came
p.6 #170-300 IS L came
Bah, anything looks good in the center. We need 300 mm corners at 100% crop. 
EBH
EBH
Nov 16, 2010 at 11:05 PM
p.6 #270-300 IS L came
myy001 wrote:
Picture of the lens? Yes!Oh boy, it is too late to take picture, even with a new lens.
max f = 5.0 at 200mm:
http://mxjkqg.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pQWGe6gL4yUgYnhFtmxSTo5h1MNX3m1zAwSZkV7HouS2_w7BpX2euPbDcpg6vQsTUwi--ChouncSVL7vSGruxkQmBU40hk23C/730l2.jpg?
that looks better than the tamron and more like the 70-200 f/4 IS
of course withotu shooting same thing and then processign same way it's hard to tell but it appears to show some promise there
kewlcanon wrote
I meant pictures from the lensmyy001 wrote
kewlcanon wrote
Pictures ? Bueller Buellermax f = 5.0 at 200mm:
http://mxjkqg.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pQWGe6gL4yUgYnhFtmxSTo5h1MNX3m1zAwSZkV7HouS2_w7BpX2euPbDcpg6vQsTUwi--ChouncSVL7vSGruxkQmBU40hk23C/730l2.jpg?
that looks better than the tamron and more like the 70-200 f/4 IS
of course withotu shooting same thing and then processign same way it's hard to tell but it appears to show some promise there
Nov 16, 2010 at 11:05 PM
p.6 #370-300 IS L came
Helen Oster wrote:
Just confirmed - it was a website error which is being corrected.
My apologies to all who were inconvenienced and thanks to all for your understanding.
Thanks for updating.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Just confirmed - it was a website error which is being corrected.
My apologies to all who were inconvenienced and thanks to all for your understanding.
Thanks for updating.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Nov 17, 2010 at 03:01 AM
p.6 #470-300 IS L came
Aaron D wrote:
You guys complain now. Wait until Canon releases an updated MkII version next year ...
http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj117/joey-fatone/111111.jpg
And still no Collar thrown in and as no one actually likes the pouch canon will stop giving that as well
Edited on Nov 17, 2010 at 03:06 AM · View previous versions
You guys complain now. Wait until Canon releases an updated MkII version next year ...
http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj117/joey-fatone/111111.jpg
And still no Collar thrown in
and as no one actually likes the pouch canon will stop giving that as well Edited on Nov 17, 2010 at 03:06 AM · View previous versions
Nov 17, 2010 at 03:05 AM
p.6 #570-300 IS L came
RCicala wrote:
I got a few of the Tamron today and I will say clearly it won't compete on autofocus speed. Its a leisurely autofocusing lens. Even the original Canon 70-300 IS is quicker to autofocus. That's probably not a key point on this kind of lens, but its a point. The other thing is the Tamron VC does not have a panning mode, it fights you if you try to pan.
That's logical. It's a much cheaper lens so differences are expected.
RCicala wrote:
I'm now out of the Canon 70-300L so I can't do a head to head yet, but should have some more in next week.
10X. I'm sure we'd all be anxious to see the results.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
I got a few of the Tamron today and I will say clearly it won't compete on autofocus speed. Its a leisurely autofocusing lens. Even the original Canon 70-300 IS is quicker to autofocus. That's probably not a key point on this kind of lens, but its a point. The other thing is the Tamron VC does not have a panning mode, it fights you if you try to pan.
That's logical. It's a much cheaper lens so differences are expected.
RCicala wrote:
I'm now out of the Canon 70-300L so I can't do a head to head yet, but should have some more in next week.
10X. I'm sure we'd all be anxious to see the results.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Nov 17, 2010 at 03:06 AM
p.6 #670-300 IS L came
I bought this when I was going to order the 70-300L for 1599.00 but as you can see I never opened it since I got the 383.00 Tammy.
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa105/Scseltzer/IMG_0351-1.jpg
100 % crop no flash. Not a good subject for sharpness but you can see the ink bleed on the label. 60D 300mm wide open. Ofcourse this is just for fun.
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa105/Scseltzer/IMG_0351-3.jpg
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa105/Scseltzer/IMG_0351-1.jpg
100 % crop no flash. Not a good subject for sharpness but you can see the ink bleed on the label. 60D 300mm wide open. Ofcourse this is just for fun.
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa105/Scseltzer/IMG_0351-3.jpg
Nov 17, 2010 at 08:40 AM
p.6 #770-300 IS L came
That Pepto is for the 70-300 L owners after their credit card bill comes in....
Nov 17, 2010 at 09:43 AM
p.6 #870-300 IS L came
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
and as no one actually likes the pouch canon will stop giving that as well
What kind of a genius criminal mastermind are you
!
They will now provide TWO pouches with the MkII!
and as no one actually likes the pouch canon will stop giving that as well
What kind of a genius criminal mastermind are you
!They will now provide TWO pouches with the MkII!
Nov 17, 2010 at 12:50 PM
p.6 #970-300 IS L came
Even if the new Tamron matches the L in terms of IQ the L still offers superior build (namely weather sealing) and I'd think* it would focus quicker/more accurately as well. In any case I still don't understand all the hating on this lens--it's certainly not for everyone.
Nov 17, 2010 at 01:27 PM
p.6 #1070-300 IS L came
M Vers wrote:
the L still offers superior build (namely weather sealing) and I'd think* it would focus quicker/more accurately as well.
This is undoubtedly very important for some. But I have to agree that the price seems too high.
I had a suspicion that this lens was going to replace the 100-400L. For a couple of years now, rumor has been circulating that a Mk2 was coming out. This never proved true. However, this looks like it just may happen -
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/10/ef-100-400-version-2-coming-cr2/
If the 70-300L is $1,600, I hate to see what the new 100-400 Mk2 is going to sell for.
the L still offers superior build (namely weather sealing) and I'd think* it would focus quicker/more accurately as well.
This is undoubtedly very important for some. But I have to agree that the price seems too high.
I had a suspicion that this lens was going to replace the 100-400L. For a couple of years now, rumor has been circulating that a Mk2 was coming out. This never proved true. However, this looks like it just may happen -
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/10/ef-100-400-version-2-coming-cr2/
If the 70-300L is $1,600, I hate to see what the new 100-400 Mk2 is going to sell for.
Nov 17, 2010 at 01:59 PM
p.6 #1170-300 IS L came
Aaron D wrote:
This is undoubtedly very important for some. But I have to agree that the price seems to high.
I had a suspicion that this lens was going to replace the 100-400L. For a couple of years now, rumor has been circulating that a Mk2 was coming out. This never proved true. However, this looks like it just may happen -
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/10/ef-100-400-version-2-coming-cr2/
If the 70-300L is $1,600, I hate to see what the new 100-400 Mk2 is going to sell for.
I can't argue as to the cost of the lens, which is high--then again it is new and those who feel the absolute need for it will have to pay the price if they want it now. I think the cost of the lens has a lot to do with the introduction of higher density sensors, which essentially extend the lens' effective reach (which is why you see the 70-300L priced so close to the 100-400)--Just wait until we see other long lenses, especially those over 300mm. We'll see how long it remains where it is in terms of cost...it could very well drop considerably.
M Vers wrote
the L still offers superior build (namely weather sealing) and I'd think* it would focus quicker/more accurately as well.I had a suspicion that this lens was going to replace the 100-400L. For a couple of years now, rumor has been circulating that a Mk2 was coming out. This never proved true. However, this looks like it just may happen -
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/10/ef-100-400-version-2-coming-cr2/
If the 70-300L is $1,600, I hate to see what the new 100-400 Mk2 is going to sell for.
I can't argue as to the cost of the lens, which is high--then again it is new and those who feel the absolute need for it will have to pay the price if they want it now. I think the cost of the lens has a lot to do with the introduction of higher density sensors, which essentially extend the lens' effective reach (which is why you see the 70-300L priced so close to the 100-400)--Just wait until we see other long lenses, especially those over 300mm. We'll see how long it remains where it is in terms of cost...it could very well drop considerably.
Nov 17, 2010 at 02:07 PM
Canongarcon
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.6 #1270-300 IS L came
M Vers wrote:
Even if the new Tamron matches the L in terms of IQ the L still offers superior build (namely weather sealing) and I'd think* it would focus quicker/more accurately as well. In any case I still don't understand all the hating on this lens--it's certainly not for everyone.
Is build quality worth an extra $1,000+? Tamron usually makes pretty good lenses.
I think* most people are disappointed that Canon came out with yet another 70-300mm 4.0-5.6 lens (how many versions of these do they really need) while ignoring the aging 100-400mm lens or some others.
Even if the new Tamron matches the L in terms of IQ the L still offers superior build (namely weather sealing) and I'd think* it would focus quicker/more accurately as well. In any case I still don't understand all the hating on this lens--it's certainly not for everyone.
Is build quality worth an extra $1,000+? Tamron usually makes pretty good lenses.
I think* most people are disappointed that Canon came out with yet another 70-300mm 4.0-5.6 lens (how many versions of these do they really need) while ignoring the aging 100-400mm lens or some others.
Nov 17, 2010 at 04:09 PM
p.6 #1370-300 IS L came
I think you get what you pay for in most cases assuming the manufacturer doesn't misrepresent his product. The price should be based on manufacturing cost and percieved value. I doubt the lens will be a dud. Tamron lenses are often packed with plastic elements and mostly plastic components. I admit they can be optically quite good. I think that build quality is everything, how long do you think the Tamron will last? Will it stand up to daily usage? The op has already stated not to expect the Tamron to be as good optically. So how much is excellence worth to you compared to mediocrity. How about the resale? If you are a casual user, the Tamron may be best for you. If you want quite possibly the best 70-300, buy the L. If you want a better price, there will be one on B&S next month or a rebate the month after.
gene
gene
Nov 17, 2010 at 04:47 PM
p.6 #1470-300 IS L came
You have to remember too that the 70-300L is being introduced when the US dollar is at an all time low. A couple years ago it may have been priced at $995.
gene
gene
Nov 17, 2010 at 05:25 PM
p.6 #1570-300 IS L came
I see pros with Tokina, Sigma or Tamron lenses all the time. Weddings, surfing events, publicity, press. Pros like to have money in their pockets, too, and if a Tammy does it for $1000 less, then that will be the chosen lens.
Nov 17, 2010 at 05:30 PM
p.6 #1670-300 IS L came
geniousc wrote:
Tamron lenses are often packed with plastic elements and mostly plastic components. I admit they can be optically quite good. I think that build quality is everything, how long do you think the Tamron will last? Will it stand up to daily usage?
gene
Well, Tamron warranty is what 5 or 6 years? Canon's warranty Yeah 1 year.
Gene (too)
Tamron lenses are often packed with plastic elements and mostly plastic components. I admit they can be optically quite good. I think that build quality is everything, how long do you think the Tamron will last? Will it stand up to daily usage?
gene
Well, Tamron warranty is what 5 or 6 years? Canon's warranty
Yeah 1 year. Gene (too)
Nov 17, 2010 at 05:40 PM
p.6 #1870-300 IS L came
Mine just arrived, and the build quality is 100% Canon L. I will test the lens tomorrow and try to post some samples...
Nov 17, 2010 at 06:06 PM
p.6 #1970-300 IS L came
I have a Tamron 70-300 VC, it's a nice lens but after testing it, it underexposures by a stop, some other batches overexposure by a stop . Prone to CA open wide. I'm sending it to the dealer for a replacement.
. Prone to CA open wide. I'm sending it to the dealer for a replacement.Nov 17, 2010 at 06:23 PM
p.6 #2070-300 IS L came
Sorry to hear that, you're covered with the 6 year warranty though. IME I have had few if any 3rd party lenses that didn't include some agravating annoyance. Some had major problems like a Sigma 50 that I sent back 3 times and finally ended up returning.
Hope you can get it taken care of.
gene
Hope you can get it taken care of.
gene
Nov 17, 2010 at 07:31 PM