Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Thanks for the thoughtful review and additional 100% crops. It looks a very good safari lens. I bought a 70-200 f/4 IS for a safari trip just before the f/2.8 II and the 70-300 L. I'm holding on to it because it is so sharp and small. If I was doing it again maybe I would get the 70-300L.
Thanks for the real world review. I find real world reviews to be far more useful than technical reviews and chart shots.
It states under "pixel peepers" that the Canada Goose was at 420 mm. However, the exif data on the download has it as 309 mm. The others are correctly registered at 420 nm.
I've only recently started but here's a few of mine. All hand-held, 7D, usually ISO 800 or 1600, no idea of the other settings.
Geese Flying (100-400 L)
IM130780.jpg by sm_carey, on Flickr
Swans Flying (100-400 L):
IM131697.jpg by sm_carey, on Flickr
Those first two images are great! That synchronous flight is amazing!
Great review. I like the simple and without emphasis way of writhing. Please make more reviews like this one!
I am thinking for a while at this lens and I was curios how good this is.
Thanks to you, now I know!
Great review!
I bought this lens month ago and I love it. I initially didn't want this lens. I was looking for Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VC and Tamron 70-300 VC to supplement my Tamron 24-70 VC but when I found this lens among used items on web site of my local retailer, I gave it a try. It cost me 70% of the new one and it still had one year of warranty. I also bought a tripod collar - Canon really can make money from nothing. The collar cost more than 50 f1.8! I somehow found the collar quite good for handling the camera with the lens.
My copy has IMHO little bit loose focus ring and IS makes a strange noise when starts and stops operating (it is only audible in silent environments) but otherwise it is flawless. I use it for animals (dogs, birds, zoo), flowers and close details in general. It has a very compact size (and pleasing weight) and fits to quite small backpack together with body, other lens and external flash.
I'm beginner and I still shoot with Rebel (and slowly collecting money for 6D) so I cannot compare IQ or build quality with other L lenses. This is my first one but it really make a great impression and I doubt it will be the last L lens I will ever buy (I already itch for 100L f2.8 ).
Edit: It is also lens which makes me think again about moving to FF. Extra reach on APS-C is a great bonus.
I don't want this lens. But then, why am I checking the current price on Amazon??
Actually, what I'd find useful is a comparison between the 100-400L at 400mm and the 70-300L at 300mm cropped to the 400mm FoV, on a FF body. Since getting a 600, I use my 100-400L less, but I do still use it. If it could be replaced by something smaller and lighter (70-200 II + TC need not apply!) without sacrificing IQ, I'd be quite interested in the 70-300L.
I had assumed it was soft at 420mm - see http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=738&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0
With the tdp crops, you have to check all copies they tested - in case of the 70-300L the 2nd is visibly better, unfortunately they didn't use it with an extender which will enhance the softness of the 1st copy:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=738&Camera=453&Sample=1&FLI=4&API=1&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0
Though even with that in mind, a tc is always for occasional use except if you use really expensive tele primes - if you want 400mm+, get a 400mm lens and not a 70-300mm zoom. The important aspect with the 70-300L+tc is that the combination is better than cropping (I'm on aps-c), so the 200€ for the Kenko are good investment and it's still a very small package.
here is the conclusion: I like the lens...a lot
... me, too, and I bought it back when it had a reputation as being an overpriced version of Canon's non-L lens - but it's interesting to see how it gained much more recognition since then. I esp. like the still handholdable weight for ext. periods of time and walking around vs. the 70-200Lii (ymmv).
Just a some random additions to your again very nice review:
* The 70-300L's white paint is just for show, there aren't lens elements that would heat protection like in the 70-200L. One drawback of the extending design is that you cannot camouflage and protect the lens completely with a neoprene hood.
* I really doubt Canon will add f8 af for the 6d and wouldn't advise anyone to gamble on that. On my 60d the Kenko likes to hunt on low contrast objects when using single point af, and for multi-point the 9 af points usually is spread too far apart - so while 6d/5d3 might do fine, on crop it's rather for static objects.
It actually focuses pretty remarkably well on the 6d. I am attaching a photo I took yesterday at 420mm while quickly tracking. I had very little warning for this shot. There are scenarios where it will hunt, but that tends to be in darker areas. I was actually surprised at how well it did. I shot with that combo exclusively while exploring a marsh yesterday.
It is not possible to evaluate the quality of this lens for bird and nature photography based on photos like these. Here, the birds are too small and span too few pixels to evaluate what the IQ is for them. Similarly, the Canada goose, squirrel etc you posted are small blobs. Please post some 100% crops so we can see the details of feathers, fur etc to get an idea what the lens is really like native and with extenders.
I had assumed it was soft at 420mm - see http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=738&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0
So, it would be nice to see what it is like in practice.
Other than the OS (Canon IS), I don't see the sigma being a challenger of any sort.
Who knows, though?
The Canon design is an ancient design with blurry corners and a blurry mid-frame. It's not a top of the line lens. It also has severe issues with purple fringing that's very poorly controlled, and as a long lens , lacking image stabilization means if you're just shooting an event or you're wasting 1-2 stops of light just to counteract camera shake without making your subject any sharper.
Here's a comparison between the 135mm f/2.0 and a much sharper lens:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=458&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=108&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
f/1.8 also makes a difference is subject isolation, and also reduces noise too.
Everyone was saying that you couldn't improve on the 35mm f/1.4 before and look what happened. The problem is that people assume a "good" lens can't be replaced by something that is earth shatteringly better.
here is the conclusion: I like the lens...a lot
...
* Close up performance is nice when not wanting to change lenses (I took some surprisingly good butterfly shots with it), but it in no way reaches the performance of the 100L macro lens. Another issue with the 70-300L is that it is missing the focus limiting switch of the 70-200L and 100L (thanks, Canon!), so if the af misses it takes a lot of time.
* The IS on the 70-300L is really good (at least 2ev) and the lock is instant and nearly not noticeable - but there's a catch since it still needs a little time to be most effective. So for quick point & shoot it's nice to have a stable viewfinder and being able to set the af precisely, but in my experience waiting for a second is a good idea.
here is the conclusion: I like the lens...a lot
... me, too, and I bought it back when it had a reputation as being an overpriced version of Canon's non-L lens - but it's interesting to see how it gained much more recognition since then. I esp. like the still handholdable weight for ext. periods of time and walking around vs. the 70-200Lii (ymmv).
Just a some random additions to your again very nice review:
* The 70-300L's white paint is just for show, there aren't lens elements that would heat protection like in the 70-200L. One drawback of the extending design is that you cannot camouflage and protect the lens completely with a neoprene hood.
* I really doubt Canon will add f8 af for the 6d and wouldn't advise anyone to gamble on that. On my 60d the Kenko likes to hunt on low contrast objects when using single point af, and for multi-point the 9 af points usually is spread too far apart - so while 6d/5d3 might do fine, on crop it's rather for static objects.
