Options for a new zoom lens to accompany a 5D3

LC2

LC2

Negan
Messages
10,447
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
Problem:
I've upgraded to FF from crop (5D3 from 7D) due to the better low light capabilities.
However I'm finding that in some occasions the *effective* zoom of my 70-200L F4 now feels a bit short compared when used on the 7D
I was expecting this, and so had previously bought a Sigma 150-500 for the times I need more reach, such as Circuit racing (Le Mans, Silverstone etc.) and probably air shows. The 70-200 is going to be absolutely fine for forest stages and I have a mid zoom for the shorter/wider shots I take such as Trains or Buildings.

I'm not getting on with the 150-500, it's probably me but I find it a bit to heavy at around 1750g.
Currently suffering from tennis elbow (not caused by the lenses) so weight is an issue. I prefer to hand hold over using my monopod.
I'm not having any issues handholding the 70-200L F4 (765g)


What are my options?
I've been looking through the available glass.
The new Sigma & Tamron 150-600mm glass I've ruled out as these are heavier still (around 2kg upwards) which from my research leaves:

28-300L - Still (too?) heavy at 1670g, but would restore the effective/apparent reach of the 70-200 on a crop. Expensive though, and reviews state barrel distortion at 28mm. But... Could be used as a single lens when in muddy forests and other areas where changing lenses may be an issue.

35-350L - Lighter at 1385g, but still no lightweight. This is an old lens without IS or lens profiles in DPP (as far as I can see), but reputed to be pretty good if a bit slow. Does anyone have experience of this lens in forest stages or in the spectator areas at circuits?

70-300L - Lightest of the options I've looked at, weighing in at 1050g. I'm 99% I would go with this over the 28-300L. Some reviews seem to indicate this isn't the sharpest of lenses though? What are the real life experiences of you chaps, am I going to be disappointed at 300mm?

100-400L ii - Again I think this is going to be too heavy at 1650g, but am I being stupid to rule it out? Reading reviews I believe this is probably the best of the 4 lenses I've mentioned. Will the improved IS overcome what is currently a slightly wobbly elbow. Cost too is a factor here, it's too new to be available second hand yet, so we're talking around a bag more than the 70-300L.


Help
What are your real life experiences of these lens? I am favouring looking at the 70-300L.
Have I missed any obvious competitor?

Thanks for looking
Tim
 
I'd be tempted for the 100-400mkII or the 70-300L depending on how far a reach you need...

The 100-400 would go well with the 70-200 lens - don't forget you can use a 1.4TC with your 70-200F4 lens - a possible other option...
 
I have disabilities, including arm, elbow and hand problems, and for me you need to use whatever aids are possible to lessen the burden. So I would try and get used to a Monopd or use a lighter Tripod if shooting out in the field or maybe using a strap may help. I have sold my 24-120mm f4 lens this week as it's too heavy for me @ 760gms (approx) to handhold. With the Tennis elbow can you have Physio or similar to help with the problem?

Onto the lenses, although I use Nikon the Canon 100-400mm seems a cracking lens after looking at the user reviews in the 7D2 thread and other reviews. Plus it give a little more reach back after going to FF.

Also, the TC maybe a good option as mentioned by Andy above.
 
Last edited:
I had a 70-300L, which is a fantastic lens, and very sharp. Never heard anyone saying it wasn't! I only sold it to get the 100-400L, which is basically the same design as the 70-300L and is also a fantastic lens.
 
I used a 35-350 for several years.....average for everything and perfect for nothing. It's a typical photo-journalism lens when the output is destined for newsprint....does the job well when ultimate flexibility is the order of the day.

Bob
 
If cost is a factor with the 100-400 mk2 then how about a secondhand mk1. For extra reach you can add a 1.4 tc as the 5dmk3 will auto focus to f8, or add a 2x tc to your 70-200 f4 for the lighter option.
 
Out of the 4 choices I would go with either the 70-300 L or the 100-400 MkII. The MkII is a great lens and would be my first choice. The fact that you own a 70-200 already then the 70-300 doesn't give a great deal of extra reach. Also on the 70-300 if you want to use a 1.4 TC to take advantage of the 5D3 AF to f8 then it will have to be a kenko TC or similar as the Canon 1.4 won't fit. (Well it will fit but you cannot zoom the lens over its range with it fitted). The 100-400 would get you back the "reach" that you lost moving to FF.
 
I brought a 100-400 mk 1 and love it blows my 70-200+ tc out of the water!!! Best lens I own!! at £650 ish it's had not to consider it admittedly I would have loved them mkii but it's just silly money at the moment
 
70-300L is sharp as a tack and well worth having.
Or what about a 300mm L F4 prime. Quite light and also very sharp. You can use a tc with it for even more reach when needed.
 
Honestly, for your requirement (300mm plus) and decent quality, you're going to have to accept that you'll be carrying some weight. A monopod is the obvious answer.

Frankly the 70-200 f4 is a lightweight lens compared to anything longer and decent (even the same focal length at 2.8 with IS weighs twice as much).
 
Thanks for the responses everyone.
@Jackwow @canon_togger @Gaz J Thanks for your views on the sharpness of the 70-300L. I guess I've suffered from treading too many reviews / comments and come away with the wrong idea. Easily done spending too much time reading the interweb, hence wanting to hear some real life first hand accounts.
The 300 will give me back more or less the effective reach of the 70-200 on a crop. It would kind of make the 70-200 a bit superfluous but that would still be handy on the 7D when my little lad is using it.

@hockeyboy150 @turbominij @Byker28i I think the 100-400 would be the way to go if it wasn't for the weight. Interesting that @hockeyboy150 has weighed it at 1870g, 180g over the specs on the web and 80g heavier than my 150-500 sigma. It would have to go on a monopod which I'm trying to avoid.

@Phil V @Swanseajack You are right, I will have to get used to using a monopod with a lens of any weight, even when/if my elbow problem is resolved I expect that nearly 2kg is going to need supporting properly. I'm not planning on getting rid of the sigma (at least not for now), so I will put it into use with the monopod to see if I can get used to it.

@andyred and others mentioning the tcs. Interesting to see the comment regarding the canon 1.4tc not working with the 70-300L. They are always a consideration, but something I've wanted to avoid. The 70-300L + 1.4 is was a thought though. Evidently not unless I go Kenko.

I *think* that the 70-300L is the way I'll go. It was my initial gut feel and the comments from those who've used it have put any nagging doubts to bed.

Thanks again.
Tim
 
Last edited:
The 70-300 is also compact, relatively light, quick focussing and quiet. Can't fault it.
 
I have the 70-300 L. I'd agree with previous comments. It's very sharp, fairly light weight and compact. Can also often find good offers for it second hand
 
Thanks for the further comments, seems the 70-300L it is then.
I did look at that Sigma 100-300 f/4 but looks like it weighs in close to my 150-500 and lacks stabilisation. I'd be buying shares in Voltarol. ;)
 
Tim - honestly, trade in your f/4 and go for the 70-200 2.8 mkII, weighs in at around 1450 but is easily handholdable all day and with the mk3 extenders you will find it quicker and sharper than your set up now. I use it as my main 'go to' trackside set up and it hasn't failed me yet.

If your at Brands any time soon - before you make your mind up - as long as it doesn't clash you are more than welcome to try mine out to see what you think

.DAVID.
 
Canon 70-300L is a superb lens. I've used it extensively with the 5D2 and 5D3 and results are always top notch.
 
LC2 said:
Thanks for the further comments, seems the 70-300L it is then.
I did look at that Sigma 100-300 f/4 but looks like it weighs in close to my 150-500 and lacks stabilisation. I'd be buying shares in Voltarol. ;)
Click to expand...

Well 300 grammes lighter, but its fast focusing and tad sharp, it was sigmas sharpest lens for ages and not having IS isn't too much of a problem especially for Motorsport
 
Thinking about the sigma 24 70 2.8


MOD EDIT: WE ARE AWARE OF PAUL'S RUN FOR THE CLASSIFIEDS, WE'VE DELETED OVER 40 OF HIS POSTS SO FAR, AND WE'VE PERMANENTLY WITHDRAWN HIS CLASSIFIEDS ACCESS SO HIS SPAMMING WILL NOT GAIN HIM ACCESS TO THE "HOLY GRAIL". NO POINT IN REPLYING TO HIS POSTS, HE NEVER READS THE THREADS HE SPAMS BEFORE POSTING, SO HE'S NOT GOING TO READ AFTERWARDS!

IF YOU SPOT HIM POSTING ELSEWHERE, SIMPLY REPORT HIM AND LET US DECIDE IF IT'S WORTH KEEPING HIS POST OR CONSIGNING IT TO THE CIRCULAR FILE.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
andyred said:
? The OP is looking for a longer reach lens than his current 70-200 as he's finding this too short...
Click to expand...
...and Paul's trying to make sure his classified access isn't withdrawn due to not having enough posts in other fora.

Bob
 
Don't know anything about it as per quality, but the 70-300 DO lens is very lightweight, i believe around 750g.
 
I think your mind is made up, but I concur the 70-300 L is a great lens. I have also invested in the 100-400 II but won't sell my 70-300 as it is so much lighter and more portable.
 
Thanks for all the comments & suggestions.
@Bebop, you're right, my mind was made up, mainly by the lightweight of the 70-300, I was a little worried by some web comments on the sharpness, but that was dispelled by the comments / experiences here.
If/when my tennis elbow clears up I may look at the 100/400 or the 70-200 f/2.8 + convertor, but at the moment I think that the lack of weight has to be the deciding factor given that the IQ should be good.

Cheers
Tim
 
The new shiny toy has arrived. Only played with it indoors in low light so far, but I am very pleased.
I was hoping it would have been here last Friday (for Wings & Wheels), but it was 1 working day too late, ah well, as if I needed an excuse to get out to a preserved railway or something to give it a decent workout.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top