Show your love for the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS

[swampler]

Have you compared the 70-200 + 1.4x TC against the 70-300. With the TC, I no longer find a use for the 70-300.

The 70-300 IS USM is a great lens. Is it an "L" lens? No, but it doesn't have to be. I have done sharpness comparisons between the 70-200 f4L and the 70-300 IS USM at 200mm and they are both amazing. The 300 loses a little detail but it is worth it for the extra reach. I will never sell mine. I still use it and will continue to do so. It is worth every penny spent. It's a great lens in the EF line-up.

Too many people out there think that unless the lens is white or comes with a "red stripe" it is not worth owning. I do not believe that. Canon has several non-"L" lenses out there that are fantastic and some are even EF-s, the HORROR!!!

Do yourself a favor, get some 1/16' tomato red 3m stripe and put a band over the gold stripe at the end of the lens. That way no one will complain or even care to comment...

D

[BobSanderson]

The lesson for me is that you need to do a fair evaluation without some instant L snobbery or blindness. I love my L lenses especially the Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS USM, Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L  and the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L (another lens that is slammed regularly here). But I also very much like my 50mm f/1.4 which does not get a fair evaluation here either. It is a real wonder.

The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS should really be in the mix when you consider that its IS cousin the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS is twice the price and that is without adding in the Canon Extender EF 1.4x III to match the reach. The cost of the extender alone is equal to the cost of the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS.

To do the very finest professional work the L may in fact be the only option. The reviews of the L lenses would agree with this. But for the rest of us where cost is a factor that may deter us from buying other desired photo goodies then maybe the non-L is worth a real look. You can produce some beautiful images and excellent enlargements at a very reasonable cost with a non-L too.

[Richard8971]

Have you compared the 70-200 + 1.4x TC against the 70-300. With the TC, I no longer find a use for the 70-300.

The 70-300 IS USM is a great lens. Is it an "L" lens? No, but it doesn't have to be. I have done sharpness comparisons between the 70-200 f4L and the 70-300 IS USM at 200mm and they are both amazing. The 300 loses a little detail but it is worth it for the extra reach. I will never sell mine. I still use it and will continue to do so. It is worth every penny spent. It's a great lens in the EF line-up.

Too many people out there think that unless the lens is white or comes with a "red stripe" it is not worth owning. I do not believe that. Canon has several non-"L" lenses out there that are fantastic and some are even EF-s, the HORROR!!!

Do yourself a favor, get some 1/16' tomato red 3m stripe and put a band over the gold stripe at the end of the lens. That way no one will complain or even care to comment...

D

Hmmm, why not just dump the 200 and go for the 400L prime or 600L prime? The 1.4 tele works best on the 70-200 2.8L as the 4L can loose some AF speed in darker shooting areas. You are now looking at almost 3 grand for that setup or about $2600.00 for the 70-300 f4L setup. The 70-300 IS USM is $650.00. It is a VERY affordable lens that delivers excellent quality for a third the price.

Not everyone can afford "L" lenses nor should they be pressured into thinking that the equipment that they can afford "sucks" because it is not the "best of the best". Each camera body and each lens serves a purpose and they do the job for which they were designed.

This thread was "show your love for the 70-300", not "Hey, this lens sucks, what would you use instead?" Let's get back to the original post.

D

[swampler]

This thread was "show your love for the 70-300", not "Hey, this lens sucks, what would you use instead?" Let's get back to the original post.

D

I actually like the 70-300, I got the 70-200 for sports, then with the TC, I just find that I don't use the 70-300 anymore. Since the person I responded to had both lenses, I merely asked a question. Not sure how you got "Hey, this lens sucks" from my post.