Canon 70-300mm ef is usm f4-5.6

G

gerbstoke

Messages
407
Name
Mart
Edit My Images
Yes
Are these any good and is it worth getting seeing that I already have a tamron af 18-270 f3.5-6.3 Di ll vc.
 
Hi Matt

Can't compare it to your Tamron lens, but I have one and yes, def worth while lens to get. I really like mine, the only reason I'd think of maybe selling it would be if I upgraded to the new 70-300L.
 
hi
I had one of these and no it won't I think.
in fact it's supposed to be a little bit soft at 300mm so you'd pull back a bit
it's a great lens though and it should have better quality through the top half of your zoom range over your Tamron
having said that I've seen some amazing tamron 70-300 shots on a sony camera recently.

so longer? no, better quality like CA and vignetting? probably but you'd have to compare them back to back

a lot of people start with one lens to rule them all
then slowly divide up the focal range to get better quality throughout...like
17-55 and then 70-300, etc
i've done this, but I secretly want a lens that does it all for travel and walkabout etc :)
 
Not really. An extra 30mm at the long end isn't worth worrying about IMVHO.

I have the 70-300mm and optically I'd say it's ok, not an "oh my gosh" lens, just ok. Mechanically though it seems an old and clunky design (again IMVHO.) The "USM" doesn't allow manual focus in AF mode, the front rotates and the IS although good sounds like a dog having a bad dream.

In these days of modern USM/HSM lenses it seems a few generations behind to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top