Author Topic: Feedback needed: Canon 75-300 (Read 10824 times)

madelaide · « **on:** May 22, 2009, 16:40 »

I didn't find anything recent about the subject, so I am going to ask.

I may be taking a trip last week to an area where I would have good opportunities of wildlife viewing. My current tele zoom is a mere 28-135mm.

There is an ad from a local store selling a Canon 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 at an affordable price. I don't know however which of the three models it is (AF EF, AF USM, IS AF USM).

None of them were tested at http://www.slrgear.com and http://www.photozone.de.

I know I can't expect a high perfomance from a lens that cost less than US$200 (and would cost me almost twice as that!

), but it would be nice to have something with at least a decent result.

Any feedback is appreciated.

PS: You may suggest other models, but the choice here is very small, and quite expensive, so it is unlikely they will help me.

lisafx · « **Reply #1 on:** May 22, 2009, 17:15 »

If its under $200 it isn't likely to be the IS version. Personally if you want to go that low and don't want IS the Sigma APO one is a better bet.

I would spend a bit more for the IS if you can afford it. It's really important and 300mm. At least I definitely need it.

Talanis · « **Reply #2 on:** May 22, 2009, 18:07 »

I have the 75-300 and you really want to avoid it at all cost. Very high purple fringe, very soft, very slow focusing and not precise. I hate this lens with all my heart and I paid 400$ 4 years ago for it. Check for the 70-300 but stay away from the 75-300 (the non-IS version at least). Even if it was 100$, it's a wasted 100$.

madelaide · « **Reply #3 on:** May 22, 2009, 18:57 »

Talanis, the 30-700 is out of question, as it must cost here at least about US$1000 (the simpler model - the DO already costs more than that in the USA), if they have it in stock. But it is important to know it isn't good.

Lisa, I saw the Sigma in the store's list, but it's out of stock.

Thanks for your asnwers.

JerryL5 · « **Reply #4 on:** May 22, 2009, 20:27 »

What about rental gear, although that may be expensive too.

madelaide · « **Reply #5 on:** May 22, 2009, 20:55 »

Jerry,
I have never seen an ad for photo equipment rental here (I'm in Brazil).

Eco · « **Reply #6 on:** May 23, 2009, 01:44 »

Madelaide

There is two IS versions of this lens (three actually if you include the DO version): the original 75-300 IS and the newer 70-300 IS. As Talanis correctly remarked, all the 75-300 lenses, even the original IS version, should best be avoided. You will be very disappointed with their optical quality.

The never 70-300 IS is something totally different though. Optically it is comparable with my 100-400 IS L lens, but with slower focussing (no ring-USM focussing motor) and a lower built quality (no weather sealing). It is more expensive than the cheap 75-300 versions, but you get what you paid for. The DO version (also with IS) is also not too bad, but it is the most expensive of them all.

I generally dislike Sigma lenses, but if on a budget the Sigma 70-300 APO lens is likely optically the best for the price, but without IS.

madelaide · « **Reply #7 on:** May 23, 2009, 12:25 »

Eco,

I saw the Sigma 70-300 APO in another store's website and I emailed them last night. Hopefully they will reply me by monday.

I am a bit uncertain however about the usefullness of such slow lenses in wildlife photography, as most observations are done early in the morning and late in the afternoon, when sunlight is not quite bright. But then my 28-135 is also f/5.6 max at 135mm.

Eco · « **Reply #8 on:** May 23, 2009, 14:32 »

Yes, f5.6 is rather slow for wildlife, but faster lenses at this focal length means a big jump in cost.

The faster 300 f4 L IS is a very good lens that works well with the 1.4x TC. The next level of fast lenses such as the 300 f2.8, 400 f2.8 or 500 f4 all cost serious $$. If funds are limited I rather have a slow 300 mm lens than no 300 mm lens at all. Of course 300 mm is still rather short for most wildlife, especially birds. Here at our camera club many of our members that cannot afford the big Canon glass use the Sigma 50-500 f4-6.3 lens with quite acceptable results.

madelaide · « **Reply #9 on:** May 25, 2009, 11:38 »

The Sigma 70-300 is not available. I saw an ad for a second hand Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD Macro 1:2 AF - any experiences with this lens? It's not the Di model.

mantonino · « **Reply #10 on:** May 25, 2009, 11:56 »

You're going to get the same results on any lens under $500 unfortunately. Well at that telephoto range anyways. 75-300 4-5.6 is a bad lens. It's not even a "decent" lens. It's bad. Doesn't really make much difference canon, tokina, tamron, sigma. The lens quality on a $150-300 lens is going to be horrible.

I don't know of any lens rental places that will ship to Brazil either though. Better a zoomed fringy, blurry photo or none at all? Up to you.

madelaide · « **Reply #11 on:** May 25, 2009, 13:22 »

mantonino,

Had I planed this in advance, I would have tried to get a good lens imported. This is not the case however, this trip appeared suddenly (and I am still waiting for confirmation). I have no expectation that these lenses would be good for stock image. I only wished I could take more advantage of the photo opportunities I may have in this trip.

I checked many sample images from these lenses at Pixel Peeper, it is difficult however to get a good evaluation, with so many photos taken at ISO 800 or more and often at larger aperture. I picked many images taken at 300mm and CA was often very high. Sometimes focus is decent, although certainly not sharp.

The 300mm length would mean an image 2x bigger than my 135mm gets (in dimensions; 4x in area). If I think of personal use - building a presentation to show to my friends - in fact I could crop the photo from 135mm to get a "zoomed" version. Hmm.

What about a converter, if I can find one, to use with my 28-135mm IS, would it be better? Again, it may be an item that is not in stock.

mantonino · « **Reply #12 on:** May 25, 2009, 13:31 »

I understand - in any case you want a lens to go with. I do something fairly often that my wife thinks is insane but it works every single time. Buy an item that you don't really want but could use. Use it. Sell it a month later at a slightly lower price.

For camera gear this is very easy. Buy the lens and sell to brazil only on FredMiranda.com so you don't pay a ton for a lens we can get cheaper in the US. You will get it sold very quickly. So buy whichever lens you want, discount it a bit on the sale. You won't have to live with a $400 piece of crap lens but you still have it for the trip.

madelaide · « **Reply #13 on:** May 25, 2009, 15:56 »

A choice I got: Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS. Good reviews. I'm still looking for test shots. Thoughts?

What is actually the "problem" with EF-S lenses? I understand it doesn't work with full frame cameras, but mine is a 400D/XTi, so they are compatible, right?

mantonino · « **Reply #14 on:** May 25, 2009, 19:49 »

http://www.dpchallenge.com/lens.php?LENS_ID=1604

All the images on this page were shot with that 55-250 IS lens.

This site is great to use for test shots. Test shots of any lens you want, really. Start here for everything:

http://www.dpchallenge.com/lens.php

madelaide · « **Reply #15 on:** May 25, 2009, 22:20 »

Thanks for one more source of info (I use slrgear, fred miranda, photozone, pixel-pepper for samples) , I only regret that the images are not at full resolution. I know Nilesh from SP, I'll write him and ask for his feedback.

madelaide · « **Reply #16 on:** May 26, 2009, 11:49 »

Well, ok, I got the 55-250 and I have just taken a couple of shots through the window. Please don't mind the exposure, it isn't good.

This guy needs his blinds and AC cleaned. This is 250mm f/5.6 1/80 ISO100 with IS on.
http://www.geocities.com/adelaide.geo/IMG_4847.jpg

There is the vigneting I read about, which is supposed to disappear one stop down.

This other one I took inside the store, 250mm f/5.6 1/25s ISO100 with IS on and flash.
http://www.geocities.com/adelaide.geo/IMG_4845.jpg

I need some real tests now. If I have the time, I'll go out with it this afternoon.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #17 on:** July 15, 2009, 01:01 »

Quote from: Eco on May 23, 2009, 01:44

Madelaide

The never 70-300 IS is something totally different though. Optically it is comparable with my 100-400 IS L lens, but with slower focussing (no ring-USM focussing motor) and a lower built quality (no weather sealing). It is more expensive than the cheap 75-300 versions, but you get what you paid for. The DO version (also with IS) is also not too bad, but it is the most expensive of them all.

WOW! You must have really gotten a crap copy of the 100-400 if it's as bad as a 70-300.

DO lenses may have some unusual internal lens flare if you are shooting lights.

Since Madelaide doesn't say what she's trying to shoot or requirements, it's pretty hard to guess what other options may be. If the goal is a cheap lens that's as good as an expensive lens, keep wishing. You only get what you pay for, and sometimes less than that.

Very sharp lens, not over the top expensive, $500+ used (same price as a new 70-300 IS), 70-200 Non-IS f/4. Reviews are high on quality and personally the f/4 without IS can be lived with unless you shoot surveillance most of the time.

Sharp, nice size, good value, good photos. Both cost about the same, but one has a much better build and quality construction. True ring USM on the 200, rotating zoom, not trombone, which may be unimportant. Quality will last a long time after the kit lens has become wobbling and loose. Do you need 300mm over a sharp high quality lens?

Something to consider is how long you plan to use the lens. If it's only a few years, then you'll want to replace it, get the kit lens 70-300. If it's long term and you want reliability, get the "L" lens.

70-300 review
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/ef_70_300is_review.html

70-200 review
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=14&sort=7&cat=27&page=3

If the question was just the 75-300 and not all the side information. Please save your money. I've paid more for a good polarizing filter than the 75-300 is worth.

madelaide · « **Reply #18 on:** July 15, 2009, 05:40 »

Racephoto,

In the post previous to yours, I said I had purchased a Canon 55-250mm, a good compromise. I was not expecting any prize-winning photos, just good wildlife images from my trip. Oh, i weather had been a bit more favourable...

I would buy a good expensive lens, but not only they are available here only by order (and there was not time for it), they also cost at least twice the price you get in USA.

PixelBytes · « **Reply #19 on:** July 15, 2009, 12:45 »

How did you like the 55-250 Adelaide?

I don't shoot a lot of tele images for stock so something inexpensive and adequate for vacation pics would probably do the trick for me too.

madelaide · « **Reply #20 on:** July 15, 2009, 16:27 »

It's not a great lens, but resonable good for its price (I believe it's US$250 in the USA, I paid around US$550 here). Vignetting is a bit high at larger aperture, a minor issue one stop down. It's not very sharp at 250mm, but ok. I haven't yet uploaded any images from my trip anywhere, but you have the test shots I show in a previous post.

chasmcn · « **Reply #21 on:** July 15, 2009, 16:34 »

I have purchased the canon 70-300 is usm and i am very happy with it. A number of images i took with it are now selling .This is a pic my newspaper published taken with the lens http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3569/3648205528_0087b90b63_b.jpg

PixelBytes · « **Reply #22 on:** July 15, 2009, 16:57 »

Quote from: madelaide on July 15, 2009, 16:27

It's not very sharp at 250mm, but ok. I haven't yet uploaded any images from my trip anywhere, but you have the test shots I show in a previous post.

Oh, I missed those. Not great, but okay, I guess.

Chasmcn, I would be interested to see 100% samples taken with your 70-300 IS. The color looks nice in that one, but can't tell about sharpness. Does the lens produce that kind of color out of the camera or did you boost saturation in RAW?

madelaide · « **Reply #23 on:** July 15, 2009, 17:21 »

I have uploaded one of my bird images, so you can have a better idea.

http://www.shutterpoint.com/Photos-ViewPhoto.cfm?id=733200

chasmcn · « **Reply #24 on:** July 15, 2009, 17:35 »

hi pixelbytes

the photo of the swimmer is a hdr so the colour is tone mapped ,this is a another image right out of the camera taken with the lens.http://www.flickr.com/photos/chasmcn/3650813029/#sizes/o/.
the original in of the hdr imagehttp://www.flickr.com/photos/chasmcn/3724409965/#sizes/o/ click on all sizes you will see a 100% view

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Feedback needed: Canon 75-300 (Read 10824 times)

madelaide

lisafx

Talanis

madelaide

JerryL5

madelaide

Eco

madelaide

Eco

madelaide

mantonino

madelaide

mantonino

madelaide

mantonino

madelaide

madelaide

RacePhoto

madelaide

PixelBytes

madelaide

chasmcn

PixelBytes

madelaide

chasmcn

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors