Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM Lens

modchild

modchild

Messages
3,914
Name
Stuart or just Stoo!
Edit My Images
Yes
I was browsing lenses earlier and came across this. I'm intrested to find if any members have this lens and what they think about it. From the write up it seems they are inbetween the usual USM lens and the L lens. :help:
I've got a 100mm L 2.8 Macro lens that isn't being used as much as it should be and I'm getting an MP-E65 at christmas too, so I might be ready for a change soon. Hard having to lose the 100 L though. :shrug:
 
modchild said:
I was browsing lenses earlier and came across this. I'm intrested to find if any members have this lens and what they think about it. From the write up it seems they are inbetween the usual USM lens and the L lens. :help:
I've got a 100mm L 2.8 Macro lens that isn't being used as much as it should be and I'm getting an MP-E65 at christmas too, so I might be ready for a change soon. Hard having to lose the 100 L though. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Not from most of the reviews I've read. The lens is over priced and the images tend to be soft. You would be better off getting something like the 70-200mm f4

Only advantage is its small for a 300mm zoom because of the DO optics, but the only other canon DO lens, the 400mm f4 DO also lack that sharpness in the images as well, only advantage is its weight for a 400mm lens.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4.5-5.6-DO-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

What type of photography do you want to use this type of lens for?
 
It's mainly for fairly close wildlife and airshows. It seems to have a good zoom range and, from what I read on the websites, has a good IQ. I've got a 100-400L already so you may be right about going for the 70-200 instead. I'm getting a 24-105L tomorrow with a 5D MkII as well, so I might just see how that and the 100-400 go together for a while.
 
Don't waste your money on the 70-300mm DO you've got the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6, your getting the 24-105mm f4, you don't need the 70-300mm, 100-400mm a better lens and covers that range. Save you money for something a lot better
 
pete.rush said:
Not from most of the reviews I've read. The lens is over priced and the images tend to be soft. You would be better off getting something like the 70-200mm f4

Only advantage is its small for a 300mm zoom because of the DO optics, but the only other canon DO lens, the 400mm f4 DO also lack that sharpness in the images as well, only advantage is its weight for a 400mm lens.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4.5-5.6-DO-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

What type of photography do you want to use this type of lens for?
Click to expand...

400DO lacks sharpness? Don't think so!
 
A friend has the 400mm DO and I've not been overly impressed with the results (action photography and some wildlife shots).

Most of the reviews I've read have said both these lenses are slightly soft, something easily redeemed with extra PP (sharpening) according to the review below, but its not the performance I would expect for the outlay on either lens, when you talking nearly £5500 lens for the 400mm and around £1000 for the 70-300 DO, especially as canon has added the 70-300mm f4-5.6 L to its lens list.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/Canon-70-300mm.shtml
 
I didn't say that it wasn't expensive for what it is; just that in my experience, based on actually taking photographs it in the field rather than pointing it at pieces of paper, or reading reviews for that matter, the lens is excellent and perfectly sharp enough for real world usage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top