December 20, 2014, 07:37:27 PM

Author Topic: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?  (Read 3391 times)

KacperP

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« on: July 03, 2013, 02:39:23 PM »
July 2013 already, but can't afford new 70-300L. Is the 70-300 DO worth to buy, when it's half the price of L?

canon rumors FORUM

70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« on: July 03, 2013, 02:39:23 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15227
    • View Profile
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2013, 03:13:40 PM »
I had one, sold it.  Best thing about it is the small size - same as the 24-105L.  IQ is just ok, needs work on contrast and sharpness in post (although the DxO module handles that well), has an odd bokeh that post processing can't fix (you can see it in the foreground of the image below). 


EOS 7D, EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM @ 300mm, 1/500, f/6.3, ISO 640

Zoom creep is horrible - once with the lens fully extended, when tracking a bird flying overhead, the barrel slammed back in so hard I almost gave myself a black eye with the eyecup.   :o

I do see them a lot on Craigslist, and they don't move very well.  So if you're going to buy it, I'd try to pay no more that $700 so you can resell it without much loss (and hopefully none).

I have the 70-300L now, it's really an excellent lens!  Despite being a bigger than the DO version, I far prefer it.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

KacperP

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #2 on: July 03, 2013, 03:25:19 PM »
I would too prefer L over DO, but...
Or perhaps I'm taking it the wrong way? Maybe I should replace 17-85 with 24-105L for holidays in mountains?

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15227
    • View Profile
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #3 on: July 03, 2013, 03:37:13 PM »
I would too prefer L over DO, but...
Or perhaps I'm taking it the wrong way? Maybe I should replace 17-85 with 24-105L for holidays in mountains?

If you have a 10-22 or other UWA solution for APS-C, yes.  Else, I wouldn't...
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

oscaroo

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
    • Facebook page.
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #4 on: July 03, 2013, 04:30:41 PM »
I considered the DO for a long time.
The weird bokeh and hazey images didn't convince me.

When the L came out I knew my prayers were answered.

I bought the L and it's amazing.

My advice: Don't by the DO. Save up a bit more.
Why does everyone put a listing of all their camera stuff here?

KacperP

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #5 on: July 03, 2013, 04:38:12 PM »
Of course I can save up a bit more, but never in time.
Holiday leave is around corner and I can as well save for another year.
For now I have 17-85 and 28/1.8.
I was thinking about upgrade: used 70-300 DO, or new 24-104L or maybe new 15-85.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15227
    • View Profile
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #6 on: July 03, 2013, 04:55:08 PM »
 Instead of the 70-300 DO used, how about the 70-200/4L new?
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #6 on: July 03, 2013, 04:55:08 PM »

lol

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 515
    • View Profile
    • My dA
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #7 on: July 03, 2013, 05:12:23 PM »
The 70-300DO has its uses, at the right price. I'd say the biggest reason for thinking about it is the small size. If you don't care about size, the Tamron 70-300 VC USD seems to get decent reviews, although you will have to put up with a backward zoom.

Back to the DO, while I had it basically there's two tricks to getting the best out of it. 1: avoid shooting into light and 2: stop down to f/8 where possible. Sold it in the end and got a 70-300L, much better but bigger too.
Canon 1D, 300D IR, 450D full spectrum, 600D, 5D2, 7D, EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 70-300L, 100-400L
EF-S 15-85, TS-E 24, MP-E 65, Zeiss 50/2 macro, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8 OS, Samyang 8mm fisheye

Sporgon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2079
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #8 on: July 03, 2013, 05:18:21 PM »
Or if you really feel you must have IS and want to save even more money ( and weight ) look at the 70-300 non L. My daughter's just got one. The rotating front element and focus ring during AF is a little alarming, but the lens is actually really good from 70 to about 120. One or two stops in it's centre is excellent at 200, but mid frame falls off, at 300 two stops in the very centre is excellent, but mid frame is bad. Wide open at 300 it's basically a soft focus lens.

The DO on the other hand does not excel in the 70-120 range. It is not as good in the very centre at 200 and 300 but the mid frame is muchbetter ( than the 70-300 non L ). Build wise the DO feels closer to a L than non L.

There's no way I would pay the new price of a DO. Used the price is more attractive, about half that of a used 70-300L. It's a tricky one really, the DO basically doesn't excel at anything. Even it's small size is negated by high weight.

unfocused

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2208
    • View Profile
    • Unfocused: A photo website
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #9 on: July 03, 2013, 05:34:40 PM »
Where are you located that the 70-300 DO is half the cost of the "L?"  Here in the U.S. there is only about $100 difference. Certainly not worth that.

Before I got the 70-300 "L" I had the 55-250 EF-S and then the 70-300 Tamron. Both were excellent (okay, not as excellent as the "L" but both very good and inexpensive.)

If you are using a crop camera and want a cheap telephoto don't discount the 55-250 EF-S. Canon did the right thing with this lens in my view: they saved money on build quality but did not scrimp on sharpness. To me, a less robust lens that is sharp beats a well-built but not sharp lens any day.

I had no complaints about the Tamron either. Also very sharp. It did have a tough time finding focus on rare occasions, but nothing that was terrible. Technically, I still own both lenses, but my daughter has the 55-250 and my wife has the 70-300. They are both happily still using these lenses and getting great shots.



pictures sharp. life not so much. www.unfocusedmg.com

Sporgon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2079
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #10 on: July 03, 2013, 05:49:49 PM »
@unfocused:

I was referring to the used ( second hand ) prices in the UK.

Agreed about the new price. Anyone buying the DO instead of 70-300L new has been smoking the wrong stuff IMO.

tomscott

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 652
  • Graphic Designer & Photographer
    • View Profile
    • Tom Scott | Photography
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #11 on: July 03, 2013, 06:13:23 PM »
I had one and loved it, great size, IS good range. I think the IQ problems arent as bad as people make them out. It depends what your used to its not an L lens. But I upgraded mine from a sigma 18-300mm and was a huge upgrade back in the day. But started shooting a lot of events so sold it for no loss after 18 months and got the 70-200mm L 2.8.

One benefit is that the 70-300mm 70-300mm L and 70-200mm series are massive and heavy the latter two being very obvious being white. The 70-300mm DO is small and black perfect for travel if you dont mind stepping down and it not being quite an L lens. Its a compromise.

Shooting with light over your shoulder can produce lovely images but you do get the slight white halo. Depends what you want/need.

Would I have one again yes. But do i prefer the Ls yes... but the Ls take up a lot of room and your better off having the lens with you than not at all.
5D MKIII 40D 17-55mm F2.8 IS 16-35mm F2.8 II L 24-70mm F2.8 L 24-105mm F4 IS L 100mm F2.8 IS L 70-200mm F2.8 IS II L 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS L 50mm F1.8 2x Ex 580EX

ahab1372

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 327
    • View Profile
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #12 on: July 03, 2013, 07:27:34 PM »
If you are using a crop camera and want a cheap telephoto don't discount the 55-250 EF-S. Canon did the right thing with this lens in my view: they saved money on build quality but did not scrimp on sharpness. To me, a less robust lens that is sharp beats a well-built but not sharp lens any day.
+1 on the EF-S 55-250mm. If you need telezoom on a budget for APS-C, this is the best value for the money IMO. IQ and AF of the 70-300 non-L is not significantly better (if at all) to justify the upgrade. No experience with the DO, but from what I read it is not better either.
I used the EF-S 55-250 happily until I knew that I'd be using telezoom enough to justify the price of the 70-300L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #12 on: July 03, 2013, 07:27:34 PM »

mwh1964

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 207
  • 5D3
    • View Profile
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #13 on: July 03, 2013, 08:33:19 PM »
No doubt. Save your money for the 70-300 L. You will not regret.
5D3 | 16-35L IS | 24-70L II | 24-105L | 70-200L II | 70-300L | 15 fisheye | 35 IS | 40 STM | 50 f1.4 | 100L | B&W Kaesemann | 2 x 600 EX-RT | ST-E3-RT | MR14-EX | EOS M + 22 STM + 90 EX | Manfrotto | Billingham | Lowepro | Think Tank

birtembuk

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 116
    • View Profile
Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #14 on: July 03, 2013, 10:10:40 PM »
Borrowed one once. Don't buy it unless you're a photo-reporter working in war, mob, revolution zones. The difference in IQ between this and 70-300L or 70-200 f/4L is quite significant. The latter allowing a 1.4X in future and also for some cropping without much loss of detail. 

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 70-300 DO - is it worth getting it?
« Reply #14 on: July 03, 2013, 10:10:40 PM »