Newbie impression on the DO 70-300

[bluz]

I was at CP yesterday (to sort out some warranty issue of a cam i sold) and stumbled upon this lens. I was impressed with the compact size, range and the new IS, so i bought it.
After about 20 shots shooting outside of my window this morning i like to share my first impressions (personal views):
1. slightly sharper than the 28-135 IS.
2. very fast focusing.
3. solid build.
4. not near L lens quality (based on my ownership experience of the 17-40, 70-200 and the 100-400).
5. not so good value for money.

Basically i think this lens trades off quality for smaller size. If i had known all these would i still buy the lens? Probably yes because at least with this lens I will lug it to the zoo/bird park along with my kid. Where as for my L lenses, they are always left in the dry box at home. Even if i bring them along they would usually not make it beyond the car boot.

[mr_jason]

Able to link us to an online page with some pics you've taken with the lens?

[Garion]

How much did u get it for?

[EOS500N]

care 2 elaborate more on why its not value for $? i'm sure a lotta ppl r interested 2 noe. anyway it was never meant 2 b a L lens so can't really compare dat way rite?

[bluz]

Originally Posted by mr_jason Able to link us to an online page with some pics you've taken with the lens?

sorry haven't upload pix for a long time liao. This will have to wait as i promised my wife/kid about 50 tasks i'd do...

[bluz]

Originally Posted by Garion How much did u get it for?

a tad below $2200

[bluz]

Originally Posted by EOS500N care 2 elaborate more on why its not value for $? i'm sure a lotta ppl r interested 2 noe. anyway it was never meant 2 b a L lens so can't really compare dat way rite?

this is not meant to be an 'L' lens but the price, DO lens and that marketing gimmick of putting the green ring seem to suggest this to be a high quality lens. given that the 28-135 IS and the 75-300 IS are both around $1K i would think that this is a bit overpriced. However I still like it as a compact lens.
Just my thoughts--mind you this is from a newbie so don't read too much into it.

[goering]

Originally Posted by EOS500N care 2 elaborate more on why its not value for $? i'm sure a lotta ppl r interested 2 noe. anyway it was never meant 2 b a L lens so can't really compare dat way rite?

As with any new technology, it's always expensive and currently production volumes are still low. Another factor is the engineering and the very high precision needed for a DO zoom lens

But bluz, just out of curiosity I have two questions

a) Did you consider the 70-200/4 +1.4x (or/and 2X) TC combo? The 70-200/4 is 17cm while the 70-300 DO is 10cm. The L is somewhat longer, but not that long and reasonably compact. Weight wise, the L lens is in fact slightly lighter.

b) How does the 70-300 DO perform in the 200-300 range? I'm much more interested in the 200-300 range. Most compact lenses offering this range such as the 75-300 perform poorly in this range particularly at 300. If the DO can still perform sharper than the 28-135 IS at this range, then the compactness may be worthwhile considering. Could you do some tests?

Thanks

[majere2sg]

Originally Posted by bluz a tad below $2200

Seem a bit highly priced...

[bluz]

Originally Posted by goering As with any new technology, it's always expensive and currently production volumes are still low. Another factor is the engineering and the very high precision needed for a DO zoom lens But bluz, just out of curiosity I have two questions a) Did you consider the 70-200/4 +1.4x (or/and 2X) TC combo? The 70-200/4 is 17cm while the 70-300 DO is 10cm. The L is somewhat longer, but not that long and reasonably compact. Weight wise, the L lens is in fact slightly lighter. b) How does the 70-300 DO perform in the 200-300 range? I'm much more interested in the 200-300 range. Most compact lenses offering this range such as the 75-300 perform poorly in this range particularly at 300. If the DO can still perform sharper than the 28-135 IS at this range, then the compactness may be worthwhile considering. Could you do some tests? Thanks

a) the 70-200 i bot a year ago could be the older version--it is definitely larger and heavier than the DO lens. This is prob the sharpest zoom lens i have. At the moment this lens is in the US keeping my 10D company. thx for your suggestion.

b) now with about 100 shots in the bag i have grown to like this lens better. the 200-300 is not as sharp as the 100-400 (i think) but not bad.
This is beyond the 28-135 range for comparison.
BTW i have sold these 2 lenses already (i think to CSer's). In SG i have the 300D and the 17-40 + DO + others lenses.
I'm going back to the US for vacation in July maybe i might find time to do some test...but will prob be distracted with meeting friends/relatives or be busy at the green.