Buying 70-300 IS-II

[Voyage]

Last week check with MS and was told the new EF 70-300mm IS-II has not reach our shore, but has seen some posting here saying its quite good, has anyone here bought one already?

Me was interested in getting one,if cost is not too high!

[JediForce4ever]

Originally Posted by Voyage Last week check with MS and was told the new EF 70-300mm IS-II has not reach our shore, but has seen some posting here saying its quite good, has anyone here bought one already? Me was interested in getting one,if cost is not too high!

reach already....

[Voyage]

Oh ... thanky , anyone knows how much ?

[Sandman77]

1120 from Ap if i m not wrong ..

Some time ago ..

[rinaldi86]

$1200 ~ $1300 ard there

[USM]

Originally Posted by Voyage Last week check with MS and was told the new EF 70-300mm IS-II has not reach our shore, but has seen some posting here saying its quite good, has anyone here bought one already? Me was interested in getting one,if cost is not too high!

My advice is not to buy this lens. The quality is so so. You will lose quite a fair bit if you were to sell it in the future.

If you really need the range, go for the Sigma 70-300mm at 1/3 of the price. If budget permits, go for the 70-200mm f4L. Just get a Kenko 1.4x TC and you will get around 280mm. The only thing is that there is no IS. Can you live without IS?

[goering]

Originally Posted by USM My advice is not to buy this lens. The quality is so so. You will lose quite a fair bit if you were to sell it in the future. If you really need the range, go for the Sigma 70-300mm at 1/3 of the price. If budget permits, go for the 70-200mm f4L. Just get a Kenko 1.4x TC and you will get around 280mm. The only thing is that there is no IS. Can you live without IS?

I'm afraid I disagree with your assessment. This lens is not L standard but really isn't far off. I have compared its quality vs the 70-200 F4, 135F2 and the 300F4 IS and the most noticeable difference occurs with the 70-300@300mm@F5.6 vs 300F4@F4 Even then, the quality of the 70-300@300mm@F5.6 is really very decent

With regards to loss of value, this remains to be seen as I have not even seen a single copy of this lens being sold here at B&S. But basing on the value of the newer consumer EFS 17-85IS, I actually do not see much of a difference vs the Ls (I believe you are comparing to that). Most 17-85 IS are sold for $800-850 while costing around $1050 new. This isn't too different from say the 70-200F4 where it's sold for $900-$1,000 while costing around $1,200 -1,250 new

And for the Sigma 70-300mm, if you really need the range, at 200-300mm, it is a very poor performer - by all accounts unacceptably soft, requiring stopping down 2-3 stops to get decent IQ.

With regards to IS, while you can live without it, in the range 70-300mm, it's enormously useful and worth paying for - more so than any other lens, short of the long teleprimes

[spartacus.ret]

Yeah.. i think that now more and more canon lenses are improving in their quality..

Say the EF-S lenses like the 17-85 or 10-22..

Plus if you the the 70-200 f4 with a 1.4x convertor, you'll need to stop down and that will not be too much different from the 70-300 at f5.6..

For the range definitely go for the 70-300.. plus IS

[grantyale]

From the MTF... 70-300 IS does good okay against 70-200/4L ... I'm feeling itchy. Somebody pour me some ice please!

[JediForce4ever]

Originally Posted by grantyale From the MTF... 70-300 IS does good okay against 70-200/4L ... I'm feeling itchy. Somebody pour me some ice please!

just get infected with the L-fever and the 70-300IS is off your mind....

[grantyale]

Originally Posted by JediForce4ever just get infected with the L-fever and the 70-300IS is off your mind....

That'd be even worse for my wallet

[Voyage]

The price of this new 70-300 IS is quite expensive ley, S$1200 ++ (CP)

anywhere selling cheaper ? Thanks

[AhmadH]

Thinking of getting one this month

[user111]

i suggest u follow brother USM's advice and my advice to maximise your budget and buy 2 lenses:

(a)70-200 f4L (used)
(b)70-300 f4.5-5.6 (or any of its variants , used)

this way, your budget will max out @ $1400 but u get TWO lenses: the L for quality, and the cheap 70-300 for the thrill @ being able to zoom out to 300mm. best of both worlds

[mpenza]

Originally Posted by goering And for the Sigma 70-300mm, if you really need the range, at 200-300mm, it is a very poor performer - by all accounts unacceptably soft, requiring stopping down 2-3 stops to get decent IQ.

My experience differs though. My copy of Sigma 70-300 (APO Super Macro II version) was pretty sharp even wide open at 200-300 (on a 1.6x crop DSLR). I know a pro fashion shooter using it as his main lens too while he was on film.

That said, the new Canon 70-300 IS with improved optics should perform well, especially on the "crop" bodies. But the pricing puts it up right against the 70-200F4L which has excellent image quality.

[MakotoMiki]

just saw somebody sell the EF75-300IS 4-5.6 2500RMB(520SGD).


also got some EF100-300/5.6L for sell from 2800RMB-3150RMB(577SGD-650SGD)
lens Se No start from UJ. Made at 1995.

Condition of items at 9

it's good buy.

[USM]

Originally Posted by goering And for the Sigma 70-300mm, if you really need the range, at 200-300mm, it is a very poor performer - by all accounts unacceptably soft, requiring stopping down 2-3 stops to get decent IQ.

It's all depend whether you get a good copy or not. Some said lousy quality but some said decent. For e.g. mpenza has experienced good result from the Sigma 70-300mm.

Why pay $1,100 - $1,200 for a non L lens? I am not crazy over L but at this price, it would be wiser to buy the 70-200mm f4L instead. As for the Sigma 70-300mm, it's <$500, so it makes some sense to buy it over the 70-200mm f4L.

[goering]

Originally Posted by mpenza My experience differs though. My copy of Sigma 70-300 (APO Super Macro II version) was pretty sharp even wide open at 200-300 (on a 1.6x crop DSLR). I know a pro fashion shooter using it as his main lens too while he was on film.

OK noted, but for me, your positive experience seems to be the exception rather than the rule. There are quite a number of comments here http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD_83600_3128crx.aspx about its performance at the tele end

A comparison shot here: http://photos.imageevent.com/sipphot...Comparison.jpg

and even our own CS'ers who commented on softness at the tele end eg this one
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthrea...ft#post1612719

It would be interesting if I could borrow your lens out for a test drive

Originally Posted by USM Why pay $1,100 - $1,200 for a non L lens? I am not crazy over L but at this price, it would be wiser to buy the 70-200mm f4L instead. As for the Sigma 70-300mm, it's <$500, so it makes some sense to buy it over the 70-200mm f4L.

I think it's a matter of perception. When Canon first announced this lens, what you typed here is exactly how I felt. I already owned the 70-200F4L then

The L certainly has some distinct advantages - the most important to me is the superior USM ring type noiseless AF, followed by build quality, internal focusing and no rotation of front element and good IQ. These are reasons enough why people would prefer the L, but opting for the 70-300 IS isn't necessarily less wise.

Firstly, the IQ of the 70-300mm is very close to the L. You may be sceptical but that's what I experienced and I am convinced I am correct based on my copies. The L is merely a tad better in contrast and sharpness and for most real world shots, you'll not notice the difference.

The IS and the extra 100mm on the 70-300mm are very compelling reasons for some to opt over the L. The lens performs pretty well even wide open throughout its entire range and the IS really helped in getting more keeper shots than with the L. Even outdoors, when the sun is down and out, I can barely get a shutter speed of 250 from the L @ISO400. And even when you are freezing motion, in borderline cases, the IS helps in counteracting your hand shake

And here is an independent review that I beleiev is of some repute: http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...56is/index.htm

The reviewer's comments:
"In the lab the effect of the new design became pretty obvious with surprisingly high resolution figures throughout the range. In fact the data was so impressive that I was already wondering whether I had mixed up the RAW files with a (supposedly) better lens"

His verdict "The performance of the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS came as a total surprise. He also adds that "So in terms of optical quality the EF 70-300mm IS can be almost described as a hidden Canon L lens"

[sriram]

I'm going to wait a while. The price will come down next year, and we'll see used ones on the market for much less.

[Voyage]

Ya, think thats a good idea. no hurry cos got most i need already.