Advice on EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

[gunawan]

Any bros have experience with this lens before? EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM.
Can share yr experience wif the sharpness of it at 100? 200? 300mm?
USM is not ring USM, so reviews dun really rave about its AF speed.

How is the IQ compared to 150-500mm sigma/ 50-500 sigma/ 100-400L? :think:

Many thanks!

 

[gunawan]

alamak, nobody uses this lens ah??:think:

 

[iRaphael]

its pretty sharp at around 300mm, to me, or at least the copy which i got.

pretty heavy lens, not as heavy as the 70-200s though.

its one of the lenses that i think the contrast is quite nice for a non L.

got not much complains about this. it's a good lens to have.

haven't tried other zoom lenses.

 

[genegoh]

I believe you can find out most of the reviews you need online. Generally I believe that the reviews are not very positive.

I used to own this lens once.
It was quite soft throughout and the image quality was not really satisfactory.
For the price, it would be better to get the 70-200 f4, non-IS version.

Cheers!

 

[KY1977]

I believe you can find out most of the reviews you need online. Generally I believe that the reviews are not very positive.

Funny. Most of the websites I visited recommed this lens (though I dun own this one), like:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

http://slrlensreview.com/content/view/71/39/

If you are not using CPL with this lens, it should not give you headaches as the front rotates during focusing.

 

[Kit]

I can't never understand what's the big deal with polarisers and rotating fronts. You focus, you switch to MF, you adjust the polariser, you take the photo. Get over it.

 

[KY1977]

I can't never understand what's the big deal with polarisers and rotating fronts. You focus, you switch to MF, you adjust the polariser, you take the photo. Get over it.

Then dun bother.

 

[Kit]

Yes, maybe I should stop bothering myself asking why common sense isn't that common afterall.

 

[gunawan]

Erm bros, Relak leh, forums meant to be used for asking and sharing rite? Bros are here to ask and help one another, so hope everyone treats all like family, wif love n respect ya. :vhappy:
jangan tension...

I've read up all the reviews in google wif this lens and have 50% contrasting reviews: A good half says its sharp till 200mm, ok at 300mm, and another half mentions its soft all the way. Some detailed reviews showing levels of CA,distortion, MTF figures look pretty decent though.

So, I assume this lens is pretty much like the 100-400L, where the production control aint very good: standard deviation for soft lenses are very high: that could be the only reason.

The other reason why I'm holding back is becos the RSP of this lens is only about US$560, which works out to be SGD$800, plus some margins for the dealer, it shouldnt cost more than SGD$1,000. I feel very much overpriced for a lens that is slow.

Any contrarians here? Would like to hear from your experience.
Many thanks for sharing Kit, KY, Gene, raphael ya.

 

[Headshotzx]

Just go for the 70-200 f/4L or f/4IS-- buy it used because they don't spoil easily at all (and there are many in the classifieds section). Having a softer and slower 200-300mm just isn't my cup of tea.

 

[KY1977]

Erm bros, Relak leh, forums meant to be used for asking and sharing rite? Bros are here to ask and help one another, so hope everyone treats all like family, wif love n respect ya. :vhappy:
jangan tension..

Well. I'm just using his language in answering everyone's questions. Shoot first and use brain later.

 

[Webitect]

I have this lens and I love it, but I think the 100-400 L is better and will upgrade to that when I save enuf.

 

[Kit]

Well. I'm just using his language in answering everyone's questions. Shoot first and use brain later.

Was the brain involved in your case?

 

[calebk]

Then dun bother.

Well. I'm just using his language in answering everyone's questions. Shoot first and use brain later.

You know, for someone who has been talking a lot in this thread, you haven't actually contributed anything noteworthy or constructive to this thread.

-----
IMHO, this lens is value for money if you need the reach (to 300mm), but if you don't, the 70-200 f/4L is probably a better choice for sharpness. I would assume that you'd use this lens primarily outdoors, so a fast aperture is not really your topmost concern, but it does help to have a constant f/4 aperture, especially when shooting manual exposure.

 

[mynextday]

wonder what is there to shoot for telezoom for indoor?

 

[rendition]

Compressed background - you'll get effect of shallow depth of field.

 

[calebk]

wonder what is there to shoot for telezoom for indoor?

Oh, lots of stuff:

Candids, headshots, portraits, stage, the list goes on, it can be almost anything and everything were an isolated subject and compressed background is desired.

 

[fz30_user]

Been using this for 1 year now and no regrets at all.. Some say the IQ is as sharp as the 70-200 F4 (non-is). Judge it for yourself at http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/73v72f4is

Sample photo I took (at 300mm)

 

[gunawan]

hi calebk, is the 1st pic of the lang zai you? hahaa, nice b&w.
I like the 2nd photo: beauty and the beast..very nice, sharp, good bokeh, and her smile captures the happy ambience.

btw are those fotos taken wif 70-300 isusm or 70-200 f4?
tks for sharing.

 

[gunawan]

Been using this for 1 year now and no regrets at all.. Some say the IQ is as sharp as the 70-200 F4 (non-is). Judge it for yourself at http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/73v72f4is

Sample photo I took (at 300mm)

Hi fz, tks for sharing. I like the monkey, sharp details but the snake foto looks soft. any PP done on the monkey?

would have got this 70-300 is usm if its priced more reasonably about SGD$800+. I figured$1k+ way too overpriced for such slow lens.