lens

[wattsits]

hi all, i was wondering if anyone had any insight into the quality of the
CANON EF 75-300mm III ZOOM Lens (MARK 3) 75-300 mm, it suits my shooting requirements, just not sure on the quality compared to others in this range. thanks. nick

 

[BacktotheFuji]

You'd be better off looking at the Canon 70-300/4-5.6 IS which has much better performance at the long end. It is, however, 2.5x more expensive

 

[LongLensPhotography]

It is the worst lens on the market.

 

[Jaycam]

You'd be better off looking at the Canon 70-300/4-5.6 IS which has much better performance at the long end. It is, however, 2.5x more expensive

The 75 - 300mm is cheap but it is useless. Rather look at a 2nd hand 70- 300 f4-5.6 if the new lens is too expensive.

 

[squishy]

or the 55-250mm IS

 

[hollis_f]

or the 55-250mm IS

If you're on a budget then this is the one to go for. The 75-300 is a steming pile of wombat's poo.

 

[phototuition]

Loads of my clients have brought them along, I thinks Jessops bundled them with cameras . And I have to agree with previous posters, awful. I persuade them to dump'em on fleabay and grab 55-250 for GP use or 70-300 for wildlife.

There is a worse lens -Kodak Gear branded fro a few years back.