75-300mm f4-5.6 IS-is it good for sports photography?

[saturnin]

is the CANON EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM EOS Zoom Lens good for sports photography(motorcyles)
i apoligize if this has been asked but i cant seem to find any other posts

never mind, now the search is working lol, can someone delete this pointless thread, thanx

[lakiluno]

turn down the font to normal please

The 75-300 isn't known as an excellent lens. I believe that its been out-designed by the 70-300 IS, although this is more expensive.

The lens is generally thought to be quite soft at 300mm

as for sports, your problem is aperture. It has IS, so you shouldn't have many camera shake issues, but the moment you start getting into lower light situations (overcast day, evening, indoors) the ISO will need to be cranked up pretty high to get a good exposure. Motorcycles should be ok. If your prepared to practice (a lot) you could pan with the lens, making longer shutters a positive thing :D. On sunny days though, it should be ok. If your funds can stretch to the 70-300 IS then that would be better.

Leo

[hudsonch]

is the CANON EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM EOS Zoom Lens good for sports photography(motorcyles)...

It depends on:
1: What kind of pics you want to take?
2: How close can you come to the scene of action?

[StealthLude]

worst lens ever.

[saturnin]

there are so many lenses out there, so hard to choose from within budget.
hard to say wich is better, tamron or sigma, everyone has different taste, lol!

[Skip Souza]

I tried shooting soccer with this lens. When using AI Servo the lens would "lock up" and had trouble focusing. I could hear a "clunking" sound in the lens and the focus was real herky jerky (technical term). I had much better results with my Tamron 28-300. I believe that the new 70-300 IS waaay outperforms the older 75-300 IS.

[and1145]

75-300 makes a good paper weight, 70-300 IS f4-5.6 Is a gem and well regarded. I think you may have the two mixed up, do a search on 70-300mm:cool:

Andy

[FlashZebra]

The Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS is a lens with a very mediocre reputation. The test link below seems to be consistent with that so-so reputation.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_75300_456is/index.htm

The new Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS has a very good reputation (please note the this new lens has a 70mm bottom focal length, not 75mm as the older lens). The test link below seems to be consistent with that solid reputation.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70300_456is/index.htm

Personally I would avoid the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS, especially if sharp results at the 300mm end is important.

Enjoy! Lon

[saturnin]

yah, sharp result at 300 is very important, waht other lens should i look at, how bout the canon 70-200 2.8L series, i just need a good tele lens, what are some suggestions.
thanx guys, youre ton of help :D

[liza]

The Canon 70-200 or the Sigma 70-200 would work well for sports. I would recommend the 2.8 version over the f/4 version, though, for greater versatility.

[lakiluno]

lol...If you were able to stretch to an L series, you should of said :D - I think asking about Canons cheapest IS lens gave people the wrong impression

Leo

[rlhphotos]

Id look more into a 70-200 F4l or the 2.8 if you have the money. I have the 75-300 III and its an ok lens, but its nothing spectacular..not even close to great either...but in any case your money is better spent elsewhere.

[cjm]

Just sold mine and am buying a 70-200mm F4L very soon as its replacement. I didn't like it too much which is why I sold it. It was heavy, very long and didn't always produce good results. F4 I find is fine, even at dusk it still usually shoots at 1/320th at ISO 200 and mucher higher the higher the ISO. Its a great lens for beginner, blows away the cheaper 75-300mm Non IS lens and its build is nice. If you can afford to though, buy the 70-200mm F4L from B&H, its well worth the extra $150. At least that is what I have been told by previous owners of the 75-300mm IS who upgraded/downgraded to a 70-200mm L. Which I believe because there are so many of them.

[saturnin]

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 f2.8 EX DG HSM Zoom Lens
or
CANON EF 70-200 F4L USM. BRAND NEW USA 70 200 F 4 EOS

what does USM stand for? I take it the canon doesnt have the IS

[FlashZebra]

yah, sharp result at 300 is very important, waht other lens should i look at, how bout the canon 70-200 2.8L series, i just need a good tele lens, what are some suggestions.
thanx guys, youre ton of help :D
The Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS will not be sharp at 300mm.

But the, the new Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS will be.

Despite similar names, these are two distinct lenses with very different optical performances.

Read both of those reviews I provided earlier very carefully.

So, the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS is not recommended, but the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS is recommended.

The first thing you need to realize is the distinction between these two very different lenses, with very alike names.

Enjoy! Lon

[Digitalwave]

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 f2.8 EX DG HSM Zoom Lens
or
CANON EF 70-200 F4L USM. BRAND NEW USA 70 200 F 4 EOS

what does USM stand for? I take it the canon doesnt have the IS

USM = Ultrasonic Motor. It's Canons super fast, super silent AF motor.

The 70-200 F4L does not have IS. It's only available on the 70-200 f/2.8 IS. There is also a non-IS 70-200 f/2.8.

[saturnin]

i did read those reviews and the photozone site, lots of great information, thanks again

i'm almost tempted to get a f4 Lens is it really that much more difference between the 2.8 and 4?

[liza]

i did read those reviews and the photozone site, lots of great information, thanks again

i'm almost tempted to get a f4 Lens is it really that much more difference between the 2.8 and 4?

Yes, there is. If you can afford the 2.8 lens, get it. And you really don't need IS with that f/4L lens. It's very light.

[FlashZebra]

i'm almost tempted to get a f4 Lens is it really that much more difference between the 2.8 and 4?
Well the differences between F/2.8 and F/4 is exactly one stop, no more no less. Personally I have encountered few photographic situations where only one extra stop allowed me to get an image that I was not able to get otherwise.

Except for this one stop difference in speed, both the Canon 70-200mm F/4 L and the Canon 70-200 F/2.8 are very similar in optical performance. They both are very sharp. The F/4 version is a lot smaller and would be easier to handle.

The price difference is about $500.00. So, you will need to decide if only one additional stop of performance is worth $500.00.

The IS version of the 70-200mm F/2.8 L is about $1500.00 more than the 70-200mm F/4 L.

For about the same cash you can have either the Canon 70-200mm F/4 L or the Canon 70-300mm F/4-5.6 IS. Both have desirable, but different features, and both are very good lenses, but you will need to decide which features meet yout needs best.

Do you want greater focal length range and IS, at the expense of lens speed (and poorer build quality), or do you want a slightly faster lens that might be ever so slightly sharper with a very robust build quality (but no IS).

It is not that long of a menu to choose only one from.

Enjoy! Lon

[AmericanFirst]

a low cost entry into the range w/ 'IS' ~$420.00. If you have high expectations of performance from this lens... you just are being a little naive.

As the crowd has expressed, the EF 70~300mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM covers the range, and is a much better lens, with a shorter minimum focus, 4.9 ft., but has a notorious and well-noted "vertical issue" at 300mm that the manufacturer is aware of. Roughly $570.00

The next offering at the same range would be the EF 70~300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM. This lens has a non-rotating front element. Focuses down to 4.6 feet and performance wise, this is the one to buy at $1,100.00 Lesson: You pay for what you get. It is recognoized as a true SPORTS and activites lens, as you stating you needed.

Obviously, if light is a factor... you go for the wider aperture...

Selections drop down to the 200mm range. The only Canon offering w/ IS is the EF 70~200mm f/2.8L IS USM. This lens comes in at around $1660.00 It is moisture resistant and "the pinnacle in Canon's constant-aperture telephoto zoom lenses". The 70~200mm f/2.8L 'IS' lens is a fantastic lens with a gutsy design and "tacksharp" results. The second-generation Image Stabilization responds in as little as 1/2 second, while providing stabilization that is three times as handholdable as a normal lens. 'IS' will automatically deactivate when placed on a tripod in order to conserve battery power. Canon's entirely new optical formula produces images that are superior to even its highly regarded predecessor, the 70~200mm f/2.8L, despite having more reflective surfaces within the lens.

You want to have fun, this is the lens to show off with. ;)

Anyway, that's the line up... empty out that wallet and fire away! :lol: