what's up with the 70-300 range?

[geekpower]

depending how you count them, canon has about half a dozen different lenses in the 70-300 zoom range, but all being variable f/5.6, is there room for another?

i'd be really interested to see something longer than 70-200, faster than f/5.6, with modern L worthy IQ, but smaller and cheaper than the big white 200-400 x1.4.

would something like a 100-300 f/4 be possible for under $3k?

 

[traveller]

Just buy the 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II (currently $1899 @ B&H), add the Extender EF 1.4X III ($429) and voila!

 

[lw]

In the UK, they are virtually giving away the cheapest model

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III Lens
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00005K47Y/

£70. take off VAT and convert currency, and that's about $70

 

[PavelR]

I switched from APS+H to FF and I needed to extend the reach of the 70-200. I did not find any first party option, thus I chose Sigma 120-300 Sport version - I do not regret the decision - excellent IQ, fast AF, keeper rate on par with 70-200 and 200/2. There is only one problem: monopod needed ;-),if I plan to wait to the shot with camera pointed to the same direction longer time...

 

[geekpower]

Just buy the 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II (currently $1899 @ B&H), add the Extender EF 1.4X III ($429) and voila!

good point

 

[slclick]

I enjoyed the 70-300L while I had it, it's main benefit was teaching me I'd do better with a 400 variant.

 

[chauncey]

Sure enough, cut those corners...if "good enough" fits your style.

 

[rs]

Also note there are five 70-200mm lenses in production

I can only count four, all L. What am I missing?

 

[Antono Refa]

Also note there are five 70-200mm lenses in production

I can only count four, all L. What am I missing?

AFAIK, both mk1 & mk2 of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM are in production & sell.

Same as both mk1 & mk2 of the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM are in production & sell, which is why the original poster counted six 70-300mm lenses, rather than five.

 

[AvTvM]

Canon selling a lens as bad as EF 75-300 III in 2016 is a disgrace.
Don't think they are still producing 70-300 IS which was far from good at 300 as well.
70-300 IS II - instead of useless LCD I would have liked those wasted yens invested in IQ or lower price.
70-300 L IS ... still OK

Don't think we need more than 2 of those lenses ... a non L and an L, of course both with IS.

Anybody wanting faster, longer or constant aperture ... lots of choice ... 300/2.8, 300/4, 100-400 II, 200-400 or any of the other Canon tele lenses.

 

[Kwwund]

Love the 70-300 IS USM. I get great images when I use it. The lens quality exceeds my skill as a photographer.

I'd probably love the other lenses AvTvM recommends, too, but they come at an $800-$7000 premium, so I'm glad to have the current option.

 

[rs]

Also note there are five 70-200mm lenses in production

I can only count four, all L. What am I missing?

AFAIK, both mk1 & mk2 of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM are in production & sell.

Same as both mk1 & mk2 of the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM are in production & sell, which is why the original poster counted six 70-300mm lenses, rather than five.

I still count four. Four are listed on the Canon USA website, four on the Canon UK website, and according to wikipedia, four.

 

[Mikehit]

Also note there are five 70-200mm lenses in production

I can only count four, all L. What am I missing?

AFAIK, both mk1 & mk2 of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM are in production & sell.

Same as both mk1 & mk2 of the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM are in production & sell, which is why the original poster counted six 70-300mm lenses, rather than five.

If you are counting 70-200 as being in the 70-300 range, what about the 100-400? Or the 55-250?

 

[slclick]

There are only four 70-200 lenses and someone is saying there are five. Sad.

 

[PCM-madison]

There might be room in the Canon range for another lens in the 70-300mm range below the $11K benchmark of the 200-400mmL zoom mentioned in your post. I have never seen/used the 200-400mmL lens, but I have experience with some high quality Canon telephoto lenses below that high benchmark. My experience:

70-200mm F2.8 v2 (paid $1400 used) + 1.4X extender
This combo gives excellent results for both FF (6D) and APS-C (7D mii). I have used this combination, but not often. It is bulky and heavy for travel, and not my best option for local photo ops.

70-300mm DO IS (paid $500 used)
This gives excellent results for FF when shooting in RAW, but not as good for APS-C. It is a very small and compact lens that I like for travel.

70-300mm L IS (paid $950 used)
This gives excellent results for FF and APS-C and is a good option for travel when telephoto opportunities are expected to be frequent but size and weight are still a concern.

300mm F2.8 IS v2 (paid $4100 used)
This is the best lens I have used for FF or APS-C. It is relatively large and heavy so I use it locally or for travel when special photo opportunities are expected.

 

[Antono Refa]

Also note there are five 70-200mm lenses in production

I can only count four, all L. What am I missing?

AFAIK, both mk1 & mk2 of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM are in production & sell.

Same as both mk1 & mk2 of the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM are in production & sell, which is why the original poster counted six 70-300mm lenses, rather than five.

If you are counting 70-200 as being in the 70-300 range

I'm not.

 

[Antono Refa]

Also note there are five 70-200mm lenses in production

I can only count four, all L. What am I missing?

AFAIK, both mk1 & mk2 of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM are in production & sell.

Same as both mk1 & mk2 of the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM are in production & sell, which is why the original poster counted six 70-300mm lenses, rather than five.

I still count four. Four are listed on the Canon USA website, four on the Canon UK website, and according to wikipedia, four.

Both the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM & it's mk2 are listed as current in eflens.com, and both are sold on Amazon, which has two copies of the mk1 in stock.

 

[bvukich]

Canon selling a lens as bad as EF 75-300 III in 2016 is a disgrace.

The only reason they still make it, is because it's actually a big seller, despite being a hunk of garbage. Nearly every "starter kit" type rebel bundle has the 75-300 in it. It's the zombie lens that won't die, despite there being MUCH better options for a starting crop shooter.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Canon selling a lens as bad as EF 75-300 III in 2016 is a disgrace.

The only reason they still make it, is because it's actually a big seller, despite being a hunk of garbage. Nearly every "starter kit" type rebel bundle has the 75-300 in it. It's the zombie lens that won't die, despite there being MUCH better options for a starting crop shooter.

Its the price that many new shooters look at. Our Best Buy store does not even stock "L" lenses, so new buyers who want a telephoto pick up the cheap one, and are often happy with it. They probably do not use it much at all. Only a tiny percentage of entry level camera buyers will want to pay $500 or more for a lens.

 

[AvTvM]

Canon selling a lens as bad as EF 75-300 III in 2016 is a disgrace.

The only reason they still make it, is because it's actually a big seller, despite being a hunk of garbage. Nearly every "starter kit" type rebel bundle has the 75-300 in it. It's the zombie lens that won't die, despite there being MUCH better options for a starting crop shooter.

Its the price that many new shooters look at. Our Best Buy store does not even stock "L" lenses, so new buyers who want a telephoto pick up the cheap one, and are often happy with it. They probably do not use it much at all. Only a tiny percentage of entry level camera buyers will want to pay $500 or more for a lens.

only really naive, uninformed n00bs who don't deserve any better buy the EF 75-300 in 2016. Anybody who asks someone like us here tells them to get th EF-S 55-250 with their rebel if they want a Tele-zoom. Also very affordable but with IS and decent IQ.

Again, it is a disgrace that Canon still sells such an inferior product. If Yongnuo would clone it, it were better. It I consider it almost fraudulous to bundle 75-300 III with Rebels in "double zoom kit" rather than EF-S 55-250.