what do you guys think of these lenses?

[piberoptikz]

:) worthy? tnx.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=WishList.jsp&A=details&Q=&sku=397663&is=USA

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=WishList.jsp&A=details&Q=&sku=391074&is=REG

[Billginthekeys]

yes. you might also consider the 70-200 f4L but if you need 300, depending on your budget those are considered the best choices in their ranges by many.

[mbze430]

My friend owns the Mark 2 version of that lens from Canon... after shooting about 4 frames with it. I wouldn't touch it with a 100' pole. But thats just me.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

The first one, I'd say. IS is a tough thing to go without at 300mm and f/5.6, unless you like using a tripod or it's a ridiculously sunny day. Seems like from what I've seen, the IQ is better with the Canon, too.

[Mowman]

I would agree with looking at the 70-200 f/4 L. You can pick one up used for ~500 or ~600 new. I love mine so far. Plus you would have a constant aperture and non rotating front element. just my two cents.

[olz]

Both are fine lenses: Read reviews at Fredmiranda (http://www.fredmiranda.com/) and browse some pictures taken with them at Pbase.com (http://www.pbase.com)

The Canon features the Image stabilization system which helps you handholding the lens in low light and at 300mm.

[Mike Bell]

I tried both on my 350D a few weeks ago as they had them in local stores. They were both fine lenses at 70-150mm with the Sigma having a slight edge. I was frankly disappointed with the images from both at 150-300mm though - soft with poor contrast at f5.6 despite being taken in good light and with fast shutter speeds. The Canon also exhibited the widely reported defect whereby the top and bottom edges were blurred at 300mm in portrait mode.

When I tried the 70-200 f4 L there was just no comparison - the image quality was so much better and just as good at 200mm and f4 as at any other settings. It would have been nice to get 300mm and I know how good IS can be as I have the EF-S 17-85 IS. Image quality took precedence for me this time.

[piberoptikz]

Thank's guys. I will consider buying this one.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=183198&is=USA&addedTroughType=search

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Atta boy. :-)

[WildWolf]

I need 300mm. That being said, the image quality of the 70-300 IS is amazing! Some lenses do not exhibit the portrait problem from 200-300. Great lens for the money!

Also, you can never really go wrong with an L.

[piberoptikz]

Alrighty then! I will go with the L. :D tnx compadres!

[liza]

The Sigma 100-300 f/4 is considered by many to be a better lens than either of these two. I suppose it depends on what you're going to shoot.

[piberoptikz]

I just couldn't stop reading good reviews about this Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Autofocus Lens. It's seems a very useful awesome lens. :)

I usually shoot Portrait, scenery, sports , flowers...etc. I think this lens is for me. It's going to be my first L lens. BTW, I'm going to use this w/ my Canon EOS 5 & EOS Rebel xt bodies.

Until I can afford this :
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=162616&is=USA&addedTroughType=search

[Nice Glass]

I own the Sigma 70-300 APO DG and I'm very happy with it.

[piberoptikz]

I own the Sigma 70-300 APO DG and I'm very happy with it.

Do you mind posting some of your work using Sigma 70-300 APO DG? :D