Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: 70-200 or 75-300?

  1. #1

    Default 70-200 or 75-300?

    70-200mm f/4 L vs 75-300mm f/4-5.6

    both no IS, no USM.

    what's the main difference between the two? one is a fixed aperture and the other is not. Will the 75-300 f/4-5.6 be fast enough for me to capture motorsports action at sepang track?

    Or i really need a f/2.8 for such shots??? however, due to budget constrain, I'm looking at the above 2 lens... pls advise, thank all!

  2. #2

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pauche View Post
    70-200mm f/4 L vs 75-300mm f/4-5.6

    both no IS, no USM.

    what's the main difference between the two? one is a fixed aperture and the other is not. Will the 75-300 f/4-5.6 be fast enough for me to capture motorsports action at sepang track?

    Or i really need a f/2.8 for such shots??? however, due to budget constrain, I'm looking at the above 2 lens... pls advise, thank all!
    i think instead of the 75-300mm get the 70-300mm. i was in the same situation as you before.

    look at http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/70300s for side to side comparison and judge for yourself.

  3. #3
    Member elias601's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    978

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?


  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Hougang
    Posts
    598

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    70-200 for better build and image quality and also with USM, it can AF faster...
    Clear Vision, Swift Action, Good Results.
    imouyang.multiply.com/photos

  5. #5

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pauche View Post
    70-200mm f/4 L vs 75-300mm f/4-5.6

    both no IS, no USM.

    what's the main difference between the two? one is a fixed aperture and the other is not. Will the 75-300 f/4-5.6 be fast enough for me to capture motorsports action at sepang track?

    Or i really need a f/2.8 for such shots??? however, due to budget constrain, I'm looking at the above 2 lens... pls advise, thank all!
    don't get zoom lenses with a factor of 4 or more.. the distortion might be crazy.
    and given the f/4, i'd take the 70-200. the 75-300 might leave you frustrated.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,078

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    others please correzct me if i am wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pauche View Post
    70-200mm f/4 L vs 75-300mm f/4-5.6

    both no IS, no USM.

    70-200 F4 is with USM

    what's the main difference between the two?
    Need to feel for yourself. IQ is also different

    one is a fixed aperture and the other is not. Will the 75-300 f/4-5.6 be fast enough for me to capture motorsports action at sepang track?

    on the 300 end if under low lights, no it will not be good.

    Or i really need a f/2.8 for such shots???

    if have would be the best, If no IS you need tripod.

    tele end 200 or 300 is depending on how far are you.
    F2.8 would be the best option + 1.4 convertor +Flash .


    however, due to budget constrain, I'm looking at the above 2 lens... pls advise, thank all!
    Member of the earth

  7. #7

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    thanks all... looks like the obvious answer is the 70-200mm f/4 L!!!

    I am using it for motorsports action, i.e. panning shots.
    do i really need IS if I pan on a monopod or pan freehand?

    if no f/2.8, is f/4.0 sufficient for motorsports actions?

  8. #8

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pauche View Post
    thanks all... looks like the obvious answer is the 70-200mm f/4 L!!!

    I am using it for motorsports action, i.e. panning shots.
    do i really need IS if I pan on a monopod or pan freehand?

    if no f/2.8, is f/4.0 sufficient for motorsports actions?

    Not sure about the monopod thing... I just went for Merdeka race with a 100-400L, 70-300 IS & 70-200L 2.8 IS...

    What I experienced was:
    IS really helps alot... amazingly, I did better panning shots w/o a monopod (most prob due to restricted angles, space etc)

    Also, depends on which part of the day your action will be. The race I was at was 12 hours, day to night. So the 100-400L did well in the day, but the 70-200L 2.8 IS was what I used during the night (cos i was doing flashless.... ). The 70-300 IS was not fast enough for my liking.

    So might want to think through before you make a decision. Sometimes might be better to wait/save abit to get something that works better for you.
    I go by feel... Never followed the rules.
    www.photosbymarbles.com

  9. #9

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    When shooting cars in bright daylight, you won't need a fast lens. In fact, when I shot a car race and set my shutter speed to 1/200s, my aperture was between f8 to f16.
    You'll want the panning effect, so your shutter speed cannot be too fast, or else the effect won't be there.
    IS would help in this area when u use IS mode 2.

    As for a monopod, I'm not sure... but I didn't like the restriction of the monopod and I feel that a monopod would be useful only if you are panning horizontally only and not at any other angle.

    As for the choice of lens, I would advice to get one with IS, so it's 70-300 IS or better still, 70-200 f4 IS if your budget allows.
    I doubt you will need the extra 100mm reach if you are using a 1.6x crop body.

  10. #10

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    Quote Originally Posted by Benjymocha View Post
    Not sure about the monopod thing... I just went for Merdeka race with a 100-400L, 70-300 IS & 70-200L 2.8 IS...

    What I experienced was:
    IS really helps alot... amazingly, I did better panning shots w/o a monopod (most prob due to restricted angles, space etc)

    Also, depends on which part of the day your action will be. The race I was at was 12 hours, day to night. So the 100-400L did well in the day, but the 70-200L 2.8 IS was what I used during the night (cos i was doing flashless.... ). The 70-300 IS was not fast enough for my liking.

    So might want to think through before you make a decision. Sometimes might be better to wait/save abit to get something that works better for you.

    wow... looks like your lens are a duplication of the range u had.

    if your 70-200L IS can do well at night, aren't you doing better with it in the day time? how did the 70-300 IS fare in the day?

  11. #11

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    Quote Originally Posted by genegoh View Post
    As for the choice of lens, I would advice to get one with IS, so it's 70-300 IS or better still, 70-200 f4 IS if your budget allows.
    I doubt you will need the extra 100mm reach if you are using a 1.6x crop body.
    looks like IS is a must!

    with a budget of around $1000. I can only afford:
    1) 70-200 f/4 L (no IS)
    2) 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM
    3) 75-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM

    *scratches head now*

  12. #12

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pauche View Post
    wow... looks like your lens are a duplication of the range u had.

    if your 70-200L IS can do well at night, aren't you doing better with it in the day time? how did the 70-300 IS fare in the day?
    We basically tried out each others lenses and swapped around to suit the different bodies... So had a feel of each. I actually used my 100-400L in the day and the 70-200L 2.8 IS for the night (Friend with full frame used the 100-400L).

    The 100-400L gave more reach. although on the track itself, I changed to my 24-70L. 100 was too much.

    For the 70-300 IS, in bright daylight not much problems with AF ... It's much lighter than all the Ls ... But picture quality can't be compared with a L lens (sharpness, AF etc). Different leagues IMO. Good as a budget IS tele lens.
    Last edited by Benjymocha; 10th September 2007 at 02:24 PM.
    I go by feel... Never followed the rules.
    www.photosbymarbles.com

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    Difference is one is an entry level telezoom lens while the other is a pro lens. Pic quality also have a difference. If u're shooting sports f/4 will suffice. But if u mainly do it as a living, then i'd suggest the f/2.8 one.
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  14. #14

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    as people have said...forget the 75-300. what you should be comparing is the 70-300IS vs the 70-200 f4L

    now i have used the 70-300 and i can say that this lens is very sharp. and IS is quite useful. so image quality wise, it's not too far off from the 70-200. do keep in mind that the AF on this lens isnt the greatest...it takes awhile to focus from the closest point to infinity (this is compared to the 70-200)

    for the 70-200, u dont get as much range and if you add on a 1.4tc (it'll cost u more) and you'll end up with a 98-280 f5.6

    so at the end of the day, if you feel you need range and IS, go for the 70-300

    if you need image quality and quick AF, go for the 70-200

    if you do end up getting the 70-300...go for the later versions. earlier copies have an issue with shooting in profile at the far end (300mm). what happens is that the lens barrel will sag causing the image to be less sharp. this is fixed in the later revisions

  15. #15

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    thanks all..... you guys have helped me made my decision on a 70-200 f/4L!!!
    will be playing with my new toy soon!

  16. #16

    Default Re: 70-200 or 75-300?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pauche View Post
    70-200mm f/4 L vs 75-300mm f/4-5.6

    both no IS, no USM.

    what's the main difference between the two? one is a fixed aperture and the other is not. Will the 75-300 f/4-5.6 be fast enough for me to capture motorsports action at sepang track?

    Or i really need a f/2.8 for such shots??? however, due to budget constrain, I'm looking at the above 2 lens... pls advise, thank all!
    i believe the 70-200L is USM driven

    think the fast u r talking about has 2 meaning here.

    f2.8 is a 'faster' lens both in terms of AF speed n amount of light
    it'd let thru.

    jude

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •