LensTip Review: EF 70-300 mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM

[ahsanford]

Better late than never on Canon's recent non-L 70-300 offering:

http://www.lenstip.com/503.4-Lens_review-Canon_EF_70-300_mm_f_4-5.6_IS_II_USM_Image_resolution.html

TL/DR version:

• Good but not stellar resolution; center looks 70-300L-ish, but it does not match up towards the outside of the frame. The 70mm wide open performance drops like a stone away from the frame center.
  
  
• Rave review of the nano USM: "the autofocus performance is sensationally fast. Running through the whole distance scale and confirming the focus at the shorter end of the focal lengths spectrum takes 0.1-0.2 of a second; for the longer focal lengths the process is by 0.1-0.2 of a second longer.
  
  To be honest I am a bit surprised that, for the first time, such technology appears in completely amateur constructions. The working culture of the autofocus, its noiselessness, 100% accuracy, and superior speed put to shame even some professional lenses. A round of applause for Canon!"
  
  

A generally positive read on the value this lens offers: "Taking it all into account I don’t doubt the lens will find a lot of happy buyers, especially that the products of independent producers, even if cheaper, are inferior when it comes to image resolution, and far behind when you compare their autofocus and stabilization to those of the tested lens."

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Side note: I am warming up to Nano USM for my future EF 50 f/1.4 USM II. This is a very positive review of the Nano, though I still want the legit ring USM + mechanical focusing if I could choose.

STM = focus by wire + both internal and external focusing designs + not that quick to focus

Nano USM = focus by wire + internally focusing + fast AF for stills

USM = mechanical focusing + internally focusing (for the most part) + (very) fast AF for stills

(Yes, there are other considerations for AF systems, but those are the three biggies for me.)

So if my hell-freezes-over 50 prime finally arrives, the middle option above -- seemingly more likely to happen than a true ring USM -- would not be the end of the world for me.

- A

 

[Jopa]

Based on personal experience - STM is great for video. Really really smooth, unlike USM. But slow for stills, where USM shines, being almost instant. NanoUSM seems like the best of two worlds. Most likely it's the future. The only thing I'm not sure if it'll work for large lenses. LR has posted a pic of a disassembled 70-300 and the motor itself - it's tiny, but it could be scalable though...

 

[jolyonralph]

No chance of a budget EF 50mm 1.4 IS USM or STM


What we will see, if the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM is a good seller is a 50mm f/1.4L IS USM to replace/compliment (depending on how sales of the old lens go) the 50mm f/1.2L USM

But it'll be a lens to compete with the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art etc. and will be at least $1000 probably more.

They'll replace the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM only when it stops selling well, or when they can produce an equivalent lens cheaper. Maybe we'll see a Mark II that is in a newer body with new coatings but essentially the same optical formula (much as the 1.8 was updated), but IS is unlikely.


However I know a 50mm prime with IS was tested for the EF-M mount (either a 1.8 or 2.0, I heard conflicting information) but that never came to market.

 

[Khalai]

No chance of a budget EF 50mm 1.4 IS USM or STM


What we will see, if the 85mm f/1.4L IS USM is a good seller is a 50mm f/1.4L IS USM to replace/compliment (depending on how sales of the old lens go) the 50mm f/1.2L USM

But it'll be a lens to compete with the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art etc. and will be at least $1000 probably more.

They'll replace the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM only when it stops selling well, or when they can produce an equivalent lens cheaper. Maybe we'll see a Mark II that is in a newer body with new coatings but essentially the same optical formula (much as the 1.8 was updated), but IS is unlikely.


However I know a 50mm prime with IS was tested for the EF-M mount (either a 1.8 or 2.0, I heard conflicting information) but that never came to market.

Which is a bit shame, if true, really. I could see Canon completing that new prime lineup of 24/2.8 IS, 28/2.8 IS and 35/2 IS with another two to three lenses in the longer range. Presumably 50/1.4 or 1.8 IS (true USM), 85/1.8 or 2 IS and/or 100/135 with 2/2.8 respectively. But I guess that's just wishful thinking from my side

 

[jd7]

I have been interested in the 70-300 mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM as a travel telephoto lens, but then Sigma complicated things with its 100-400C. The Canon would be smaller and lighter (good for travel), but the Sigma's extra reach and seemingly better IQ (from what I've read so far) for moderately more weight (and cost) has got me wondering if it might be the better option for me (if/when I get around to buying a travel telephoto).

 

[ahsanford]

No chance of a budget EF 50mm 1.4 IS USM or STM

Depends on what you call budget. When the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM was released in the early 90s, MSRP was ~ $500 if Wikipedia is to be trusted. Now it's $329.

The latest rumor is not to have IS, and likely Nano USM, so it will be an EF 50mm f/1.4 USM II (apparently Nano doesn't reset the roman numeral version based on the 70-300 nano release). My guess is a non ring-USM / non-IS lens would be perhaps $500 or so. Ring USM with mechanical FTM focusing would command a higher price.

They'll replace the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM only when it stops selling well, or when they can produce an equivalent lens cheaper.

Not convinced this will be a $329 market in perpetuity. It's a mid-level prime, not an entry level prime. It's not like the 50 f/1.8 II being replaced with the 50 f/1.8 STM for a similar-ish price. Consider: when Canon did the 24/28/35 IS refresh lenses, the new ones cost a great deal more than what the original versions cost. They may do that again with a future 50 f/1.4 replacement.

- A