Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 USM [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

Tundrasport

19th of June 2006 (Mon), 10:00

Slow, noisy, hunts around a bit, but I still love mine! It took me awhile to learn to use this lens but I think you can get some great results! I was going to sell it after I purchassed my 100-400L, and really there is no camparison. I decieded to keep it for those situations, like Mud Fest, iffy weather, don't want to stand out too much etc. 170 mm 1/1000 f5.6

loosecannon

19th of June 2006 (Mon), 10:00

Taken with 75-300 IS, a much maligned lens

87847

jbkalla

19th of June 2006 (Mon), 10:28

Nice pics!

I've all but decided to eventually get the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 Macro, but I won't be able to afford it for awhile! :-(

Guess I'll only use the zoom on those super-sunny days!

jj1987

19th of June 2006 (Mon), 10:32

We could all blur our images from the 100-400 or 70-200 and post them for you?

Just trying to help.

lomond

19th of June 2006 (Mon), 10:53

75-300 IS owner and not ashamed to say so. ( I still include it in my sig )
Obviously not the sharpest tool in the box but I've managed some keepers.
This is a 100% crop on a nice summers day on Lake Windermere ( the lens does needs the light ).
Haven't used it for a long time. :o

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v488/lomond/Jet-Ski.jpg

Hated the lens creep. :evil:

delhi

19th of June 2006 (Mon), 11:26

I dunno. I picked this lens up as an emergency. I'm going to return it however. I much prefer the Sigma APO which I tried. It's not like it's bad, but it could've been better.

http://iciclelanding.com/aperture?hascaption=9&photo=128654&size=768&view=image&bogus=.jpg

http://iciclelanding.com/aperture?hascaption=9&photo=129192&size=768&view=image&bogus=.jpg

zacker

19th of June 2006 (Mon), 11:29

i got rid of mine because it was soo slow. It did take some ok shots though.
http://zacker.smugmug.com/photos/54349339-L.jpg
-zacker-

blueroioq

19th of June 2006 (Mon), 12:19

75-300 III usm
slow but this is all i have at this focal :)
1/250s f/5.6 260mm iso 1600
100% crop, parameter2 with a high pass layer
saved for web in ps 80% quality

jbkalla

21st of June 2006 (Wed), 15:17

Nice shots, everyone!

I think my next purchases will have to be the 70-200mm f/2.8L and then the 17-40L. I've got to get some better glass!

picturecrazy

21st of June 2006 (Wed), 15:40

I don't think this lens deserves all the bad rap it gets. I have the 75-300, and I paid $100 for it. It is under $200 new. It does a FANTASTIC job for $200, more than you could ask for.

http://yoonl.brinkster.net/misc/birds/b3.jpg

http://yoonl.brinkster.net/misc/birds/b4.jpg

TH!EN

21st of June 2006 (Wed), 16:21

its funny, this lense can produce some decent images, but feels like crap.
these shots were in hawaii and i needed the range.

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/21566891/

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/21439938/

http://www.deviantart.com/view/21439806/

shadowlands

17th of November 2007 (Sat), 09:42

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x31/fromshadowlands/H-TownIlow-res.jpg
Houston's skyline
(Canon EF 75-300 III)

AndySix

17th of November 2007 (Sat), 17:51

http://gallery.andycam.net/albums/julian-hytten-06/aIMG_0759.jpg

http://www.andycam.no/albums/dtm05/aIMG_5245.jpg

1/250 sec, f 8, 300 mm and ISO100:
http://www.andycam.no/albums/dtm05/aIMG_5215.jpg

1/250 sec, f 9, 300 mm and ISO100:
http://www.andycam.no/albums/dtm05/aIMG_5202.jpg

Have sold this lence, though. Expecting delivery of a 70-200 F4L.

Grentz

17th of November 2007 (Sat), 17:59

Nice shots guys, I will have to dig up some of my shots from my 75-300 III USM.

Not a horrible lens IMO for the price. The non-USM is REALLY slow though, so I would recommend at least getting the USM version.

Mine has since been sold though as I moved up to the 100-400.

thrash_273

17th of November 2007 (Sat), 18:13

i sold mine couple of days ago. but here are some remembrance.=)

AndySix

30th of November 2007 (Fri), 10:06

Here are a couple more from me. I used this sometimes as a portrait lense before. These are taken with this lense and my old 300D. Wonder how much difference it'll be with my upgraded gear as I think these are quite good.

http://www.andycam.no/rot/portrett1.jpg

http://www.andycam.no/rot/portrett2.jpg

crosswind

30th of November 2007 (Fri), 11:31

Here's some birds.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2388/2050824383_ae634aa93d_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2212/2050823521_099e12cf65_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2279/2051607718_49ea5aa273_b.jpg

Shot with a 40D and 75-300 IS, but I just got my new 70-200 2.8 and can't wait to try again!

G

juejaimon

13th of January 2008 (Sun), 23:00

crosswind...those are some pretty nice shots... i say you have got yourself a great copy... i have this lens as well..and my copy is excellent as well....

thinking of going the 70-200 route...but this 75-300 is already so impressive already.... can't wait to see your comparisons...

:)

Here's some birds.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2388/2050824383_ae634aa93d_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2212/2050823521_099e12cf65_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2279/2051607718_49ea5aa273_b.jpg

Shot with a 40D and 75-300 IS, but I just got my new 70-200 2.8 and can't wait to try again!

G

jmann12180

14th of January 2008 (Mon), 15:06

These two were shot with the non IS version of the 75-300. I'm a very very very new photographer so in the hands of some else that has been doing this a while longer, the pics I'm sure would be a little more crisp.

These were shot hand held.

Enjoy, I do enjoy this lens. I too am looking forward to the day I pick up a 70/200 for shooting wildlife.

Thanks
Mike

Dori

14th of January 2008 (Mon), 17:35

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1022/1412643492_03e7c1d01f.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1347/1275797079_846300a6e1.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/218/502587926_f98e32aad6.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2067/1764941799_42f6180780.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2007/2096150581_9249f19dbf.jpg

ypx3

15th of January 2008 (Tue), 21:15

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f367/ypx3/IMG_3966.jpg
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f367/ypx3/IMG_3992.jpg
I am not a pro so I have to sit the stands with the rest of the peons
These were shot at full zoom

juejaimon

26th of January 2008 (Sat), 19:32

Here's one with my 75-300 IS version...

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x293/juejaimon/IMG_75871.jpg

cesstrelle

31st of January 2008 (Thu), 12:04

I have the 75-300 f4/5.6 USM IS. (I see in the post title that this thread is for the non-IS version?) I've had this lens it seems like forever :lol: , Maybe ten years? I used it on my old Elan II, then on the digital rebel and then on the XTi. I just got the 70-200mm L so this lens doesn't see much use anymore since the L is consistently sharper.

Here's some of my better images with that lens....

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1255/1042955191_ef7c278c43.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1073/1298264628_fac96d7d53.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2411/1880613794_86e5e8c6da.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1404/1253475503_20af3d08be.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2109/1510321988_8eabdba95b.jpg

john_rich

20th of February 2008 (Wed), 02:49

i still have mine, here's some i've taken...:D

http://images.johnrichvillas.multiply.com/image/9/photos/44/500x500/8/_MG_8612.jpg?et=DqmTBAJ2t991%2Cp2ZOrxqMw&nmid=67845192

http://images.johnrichvillas.multiply.com/image/8/photos/44/500x500/5/_MG_8591.jpg?et=Y5SbKPab06PoCAWaDCBbTw&nmid=67845192

http://images.johnrichvillas.multiply.com/image/6/photos/58/500x500/2/_MG_6866.jpg?et=2W%2BsAdBn%2B4dzG%2CZH5m9uuw&nmid=74899466

http://images.johnrichvillas.multiply.com/image/11/photos/55/500x500/1/Sunset1.jpg?et=kdr%2C6no5hjz4Q%2C5swqmSQA&nmid=72021997

RodneyCyr

20th of February 2008 (Wed), 14:55

I took both of these indoors, in the Napoleonic Apartments at the Louvre, Paris France. For both I used the Canon 70-300IS, at f/5.6, with shutter speeds near 1/50 second and focal lengths near 135mm.

thievery

3rd of March 2008 (Mon), 14:57

75-300 Non-IS:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/128/391241432_d0da4839aa.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/72/391241438_2cf4b55c91.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/121/260150850_31dfd5c71f.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/111/260068765_a4e5e0dc91.jpg

Max F

3rd of March 2008 (Mon), 21:13

Which proves the point - its not so much the lens but the person behind it that counts.

John_B

17th of March 2008 (Mon), 18:16

aladyforty

18th of March 2008 (Tue), 08:18

I constantly see people on the forum put this lens down. I personally find its great for a very low cost zoom lens. It works well with my FF 5D and my 1.6 crop DSLR's

Here are some examples
Having Breakfast (http://johnbdigital.com/wildlife/IMG_1383.htm)
http://johnbdigital.com/wildlife/IMG_1383.jpg
click for specs (http://johnbdigital.com/wildlife/IMG_1383.htm)

Over the Mist (http://johnbdigital.com/sunrise_set/over_the_mist.htm)
http://johnbdigital.com/sunrise_set/over_the_mist.jpg
click for specs (http://johnbdigital.com/sunrise_set/over_the_mist.htm)

Red Leaf a macro with 68mm Kenko extension tubes (http://johnbdigital.com/macro/9248.htm)
http://johnbdigital.com/macro/9248.jpg
click for specs (http://johnbdigital.com/macro/9248.htm)

Contemplation (http://johnbdigital.com/pets/contemplation.htm)
http://johnbdigital.com/pets/contemplation.jpg
click for specs (http://johnbdigital.com/pets/contemplation.htm)

Here I have a couple of photos with 100% crops of photos taken with the Canon 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM <-- click to see (http://johnbdigital.com/lenses/ef75_300_f4_5_6.php)

Here I have a comparison of the 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM at 300mm f/8 and the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L at 300mm f/8 <-- click to see (http://johnbdigital.com/lenses/100_400L_vs_75_300.php)

I’m glad I saw these; I just purchased this lens for my husband. He is not as serious about his photography as me and just wanted to replace his broken 100-300. His first images are not too bad but we have not had the weather conditions to test it yet. I am going to mount this lens to my camera this week and take some shots to post in here. This is no L lens but I think as your photos show it also depends on who is behind the camera and how well they post process

aladyforty

18th of March 2008 (Tue), 21:01

Just purchased the canon EF 75-300 usm mkIII which is bagged quite a bit in different camera sites. We had to replace hubbies 100-300 lens he had which had died on us and with a budget of $300 (Australian) this was the best buy at $269. Personally I think it is not too bad a lens, not an L lens but can produce quite acceptable images. These are my test shots on My canon 30D

The set of test shots can be seen here with some details of the post processing to each photo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25426422@N00/sets/72157604154070336/

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2351/2344642946_4385928ae7_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2335/2343809573_b57be8c749_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3159/2343809393_7cf114df34_o.jpg

SuperBet

26th of March 2008 (Wed), 14:36

I have the 75-300 IS USM. I have to send it for a check, maybe they have to re-calibrate it, becuase it's working awfully bad!!!

skidog

29th of April 2008 (Tue), 18:11

My first shots with my ef 75-300.

http://img2.putfile.com/thumb/4/11919084552.jpg (http://www.putfile.com/pic/8070851)

http://img2.putfile.com/thumb/4/11919084647.jpg (http://www.putfile.com/pic/8070852)

http://img2.putfile.com/thumb/4/11919084622.jpg (http://www.putfile.com/pic/8070853)

http://img2.putfile.com/thumb/4/11919084664.jpg (http://www.putfile.com/pic/8070854)

promod

29th of April 2008 (Tue), 19:19

<a href="http://s109.photobucket.com/albums/n46/spyder64/?action=view&current=06-E-TOWN145.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n46/spyder64/06-E-TOWN145.jpg" bor<a href="http://s109.photobucket.com/albums/n46/spyder64/?action=view&current=INDY-04-SAT129.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n46/spyder64/INDY-04-SAT129.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>der="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

paparios

29th of April 2008 (Tue), 20:26

This was taken with the very first of the 75-300 f4-5.6 lenses (the one without USM and without IS, from the 80s). The first shot is 75mm, iso 200, 1/320, f8.
I think f8 is the best value for this lens giving good results even at 300 mm
(the second shot is 300mm, iso200, 1/50, f8).

Miguel

jde95tln

29th of April 2008 (Tue), 20:34

Here's a couple from me. I haven't used this lens all that much since I got it. Pretty much just on these shots I took of some local police looking for someone in the area near my house.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3225/2301886440_c9127d5803.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3269/2301095145_42d07e222f.jpg

Richardwolves

1st of May 2008 (Thu), 14:28

When i first got this lens i wasn't that impressed. Now i have played with it and got used to it it produces very good results for the cost of it.

exposureDPI

1st of May 2008 (Thu), 16:43

Although it's listed in my gear list - the CA on mine renders it almost useless.

Nistelrooydude

4th of May 2008 (Sun), 15:45

This is definatly not Canon's worst lens. How dare you say that? Canon makes a non-USM version of this lens.

My LR metadata browser is messed, but I know I took this with 75-300 USM

MTlens

7th of May 2008 (Wed), 20:38

These are some photos i have taken recently within a couple months =D. People say this is a bad lens but i think its not bad its just a nice start out lens. It gets some pretty good images once in a while.http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a328/sayrevanoma/IMG_0428.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a328/sayrevanoma/IMG_0494.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a328/sayrevanoma/IMG_0510.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a328/sayrevanoma/MTlens-1202002503.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a328/sayrevanoma/IMG_1169.jpg

nutari

8th of May 2008 (Thu), 21:26

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2347/2458841472_67f473a0aa_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3038/2458837922_b6a303e654_b.jpg

nutari

8th of May 2008 (Thu), 21:28

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3022/2390617726_9c1f25e646_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3110/2390601742_f15fb0281d_b.jpg

FLuX43

8th of May 2008 (Thu), 22:53

This might not be the best shot on here but it was very hard for me to get because I was at 300mm handholding with a shutter of 1/200 on a crop body. Also I'm so excited just ordered my 70-200 2.8L today

EXIF 300mm, F5.6, ISO 400
http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/8249/img8924js5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

jde95tln

9th of May 2008 (Fri), 06:49

I took these with my 75-300. Posted in another thread.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=500132

Zeegs

20th of May 2008 (Tue), 19:46

Taken with a 300D and the 75-300 USM non-IS version hand held. Other than kit lens and the nifty-fifty it's all I have/can really afford right now. I know it's not perfect, but I haven't had the chance to use better glass.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2397/2465849469_66cfdbc564_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3200/2466672870_b2d8bed72c_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3179/2466640564_04f7900cf8_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2298/2444556692_ca533aa678_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2180/2466670300_8841d41182_b.jpg
Full width, cropped height
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3186/2457904458_9c749925a3_b.jpg

http://flickr.com/photos/zeegs/ more on here, only own 3 lenses like I said so they are easy to pick out.

raido

22nd of May 2008 (Thu), 09:06

http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh42/switchswitch0/IMG_1850-1.jpg
ShutterSpeedValue : 1/200Sec
ApertureValue : F4,5
FocalLength : 120,00(mm)
ISOSpeedRatings :200<br>
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh42/switchswitch0/IMG_2142-1.jpg

ShutterSpeedValue : 1/200Sec
ApertureValue : F8,0
FocalLength : 300,00(mm)
ISOSpeedRatings : 100

BluewookieJim

23rd of May 2008 (Fri), 16:46

I don't have the USM version of this lens, I've got the 4-5.6 III version from the triple rebates a couple years ago. This lens has hardly been used, but I've found myself yearning for some long zooms lately.

This picture isn't quite a long zoom, I was waiting to catch a cardinal in my backyard, and our cat Buddy decided to fix himself right on the ledge of our deck in front of my tripod, so I was obligated to take a few snaps. My wife liked this particular shot so much that shes getting a framed and matted 8*12 of it for her bday next week.

Exif info:
200 ISO, 1/30 at F/4.5, 105mm focal length. Tripod, MLU, and POTN shutter release...

http://photos.kodanja.net/img/v1/p528468929-3.jpg

jde95tln

26th of May 2008 (Mon), 23:49

Here's a recent one. Not USM but the 4-5.6 III, though.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3163/2523910152_7b5ffced4e_b.jpg

buyusfear

16th of June 2008 (Mon), 23:35

Oft-hailed as the crappiest (is that a word?) lens Canon has ever made!

I wish I would have read that somwhere, last summer before I bough it. I searched on here before I bought it, looking for a godd beginer zoom lens, and no one seemed to express that same feeling. At least not in the threads I found.

I raely use it. But it has been a great lens whenever I have used it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/buyusfear1/Edmonton%20grandPrix/EdmontonGrandPrixday1144.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/buyusfear1/Edmonton%20grandPrix/EdmontonGrandPrixday1078.jpg

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e312/buyusfear3/Polly%20birthday%202007/Grandmas75thb-dayAugust112007023.jpg

jde95tln

21st of June 2008 (Sat), 04:25

I was pretty shocked by this one I took with this lens. I haven't used it much but I'm going to start playing around with it more now.

TV : 1/160th
AV : f/4
Focal Length 75mm.
ISO : 800

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3081/2592116270_49cb3eb561_b.jpg

Electric Shepherd

4th of July 2008 (Fri), 02:26

Some offerings from me that I took at Wimbledon this week with this lens:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3189/2628576505_bb712f7de7_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3262/2629395872_e7c6ae6ca0_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3124/2629396976_652599c518_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3259/2628577355_9423cea550_o.jpg

paparios

19th of August 2008 (Tue), 14:41

When stopped down to f7-f8 it gives good results at 300mm

Examples are first with the 400d, f7.1, 1/2000, ISO1600, directly converted from RAW and no sharpening and the second, f8, 1/1000, ISO400

Miguel

jaskel

18th of October 2008 (Sat), 07:30

Here is a few from mine on my 400D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v371/jaskel/2006%20Airshow/airshow45b.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v371/jaskel/2006%20Airshow/airshow30b.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v371/jaskel/2006%20Airshow/airshow101b.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jaskel3/beesmaller.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jaskel3/Pasha%20Bulker/pb14.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jaskel3/Pasha%20Bulker/pb14.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jaskel3/Pasha%20Bulker/pb10.jpg

jaskel

18th of October 2008 (Sat), 07:30

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jaskel3/Pasha%20Bulker/pb14.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jaskel3/SNOW/SteaminSun.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jaskel3/Torana/Torana055.jpg

http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd317/dodge-downunderdotcom/Nitroman/Grille/NitroGrille013.jpg

SeinUndZeit

3rd of January 2009 (Sat), 15:18

One I took with the lens wide open.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3150/2975177808_7469c0db3f.jpg

cancan7

5th of January 2009 (Mon), 01:49

Here's my contribution:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3228/2947321744_24cea251c0_b.jpg

Amazing shots everybody! I'm saving up to get the 70-200 2.8 L IS USM, but you've shown its possible to get keepers from this much maligned lens.

EvenBid50

10th of January 2009 (Sat), 14:32

just picked up my first zoom lens , and it happens to be the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III.
Seen alot of Nice pics taken with this lens, we'll see how it turns out.

sancho1983

16th of March 2009 (Mon), 15:03

http://i635.photobucket.com/albums/uu79/sancho_1983/editedIMG_5667.jpg

http://i635.photobucket.com/albums/uu79/sancho_1983/editedmeadowducks_11.jpg

http://i635.photobucket.com/albums/uu79/sancho_1983/editedmeadowducks_14.jpg

http://i635.photobucket.com/albums/uu79/sancho_1983/editedmeadowducks_58.jpg

Might buy this lens from a friend, these shots seem ok with it

OBIUNO

18th of March 2009 (Wed), 14:36

cool, just got this

kidfiji

29th of April 2009 (Wed), 22:34

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x31/fromshadowlands/H-TownIlow-res.jpg
Houston's skyline
(Canon EF 75-300 III)

amazing shot!

beano

1st of May 2009 (Fri), 15:06

This shot was taken with a borrowed 75-300 a couple of years ago...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v615/beanzzzz/Fungus1webcopy.jpg

And i've just been given one today, so there might possibly be some more shots with it in the future.. :D

ignutzz

6th of May 2009 (Wed), 09:12

I just got one of these for free but haven't had a chance to use it yet. After reading the reviews around the web it's nice to see the great shots in here! :lol:

treeoflife08

8th of May 2009 (Fri), 17:56

I'm pretty impressed with this lens. here r some pics from last weekend.. c&c welcome

treeoflife08

8th of May 2009 (Fri), 18:02

some more pics

Electric Shepherd

15th of June 2009 (Mon), 02:36

Tried my 75-300 at a tennis tournament for a few shots just to see how it fared against my 70-210 which I used most of the day. Badly, is the answer - slow AF and general softness was the result, although out of the dozen or so shots I took I did manage to get one which was pretty good although that's a pretty low keeper rate.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2435/3626344344_6d010ed628_o.jpg

MJones

20th of June 2009 (Sat), 19:44

450D with the 75-300mm USM III.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3370/3607552249_fff6ab4a02_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3383/3555678357_70d410f955_o.jpg

Jetmech1

21st of June 2009 (Sun), 11:38

These are a few of my daughter at horse camp this past week. Even with it's faults I still like this lens.

Jetmech1

21st of June 2009 (Sun), 11:39

A couple more.

Jetmech1

21st of June 2009 (Sun), 11:41

Here are a couple of tries at B & W conversion with iPhoto.

WingsofFury

22nd of June 2009 (Mon), 19:18

Let me tell ya, it can catch fast moving objects - take these from this past weekends air show.

http://i460.photobucket.com/albums/qq326/WingsofFuryPhotography/F-15EagleBurnerandVapes1.jpg

http://i460.photobucket.com/albums/qq326/WingsofFuryPhotography/CF-18BurnerwVapour4.jpg

http://i460.photobucket.com/albums/qq326/WingsofFuryPhotography/CF-18Vapour3.jpg

http://i460.photobucket.com/albums/qq326/WingsofFuryPhotography/CF-18Vapour4.jpg

Jetmech1

22nd of June 2009 (Mon), 19:34

Very nice work. It has been many years since I was at an airshow. But I have seen and worked on the best planes when I was in the USAF. I was a mechanic on the U-2 and SR-71.

jay415

30th of June 2009 (Tue), 01:42

My son last August
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3303/3575278642_baf6691c76_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38869439@N04/35
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38869439@N04/35

YankeeMom

31st of August 2009 (Mon), 16:08

I got this lens years ago in a kit purchase (for me it was with my film camera), but I'm loathe to let it go yet (even though I am getting another zoom soon.)

Once in awhile I dig it out, stick it on my DSLR, and surprise myself. This cheapo is much maligned, but it's who's behind the camera that really matters! (I love a challenge.) Some recent shots:

Nice bokeh:
f/7.1
170mm
ISO 200

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2659/3868287020_5203f1093b.jpg

Not too shabby for some portraits. Caught my reluctant model.

f/5.0
125mm
ISO 400

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2642/3747443929_31a89857bf.jpg

jmcder53

5th of September 2009 (Sat), 23:44

i have this lens as well, bought it about 10 years ago when i was in college shortly after i bought an elan IIe. it's done ok but seems to be soft with my 20d.
some of these photos look incredibly sharp, others seem soft, were some of these shots edited or straight from the camera.?

YankeeMom

6th of September 2009 (Sun), 12:59

Mine were slightly edited. Of course, my little girl is a conversion. I always sharpen my photos, at least, a little (no matter what lens I use.)

YankeeMom

6th of September 2009 (Sun), 13:26

Pictures at the good ole zoo:

f/5.6
240mm
ISO 200

Jaguar through cage:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3425/3867509913_e2c0cf1110.jpg

f/5.0
160mm
ISO 200

Female tiger:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2616/3725606944_4a2aac473b.jpg

WingsofFury

10th of September 2009 (Thu), 07:33

Here's a great blue heron coming in to land from yesterday...

http://i460.photobucket.com/albums/qq326/WingsofFuryPhotography/Herons/GreatBlueHeronLanding1.jpg

http://i460.photobucket.com/albums/qq326/WingsofFuryPhotography/Herons/GreatBlueHeronLanding2.jpg

http://i460.photobucket.com/albums/qq326/WingsofFuryPhotography/Herons/GreatBlueHeronLanding3.jpg

andreasthess

5th of October 2009 (Mon), 14:08

Some mine,with my IS version

http://xs344.xs.to/xs344/09411/img_2367_1856.jpg

http://xs844.xs.to/xs844/09411/img_2510783.jpg

http://xs844.xs.to/xs844/09411/img_2520748.jpg

http://xs344.xs.to/xs344/09411/img_2569730.jpg

they look soft enough in the 300mm setting

jaskel

5th of October 2009 (Mon), 15:08

hmm mine dont come out as clear as those....what settings u guys mainly use?

Also have u downloaded the new hacked firmware for 3200iso and spot metering??

andreasthess

5th of October 2009 (Mon), 16:45

There is a large amount of sharpening on those pictures jaskel.
The first one is the only one thats over 200mm (it is been shot at 265mm) were the bigest problem of the lens is,and you can see clearly the softness.
The other three ones,that are decent enough,are been shot in 110mm,180mm and 160mm respectively.
I've use some high shutter speed,because i know that the lens is very slow during focusing (the first,the third and the fourth are been shot with 1/500,and the second one at 1/250) with 400ISO to give me aperture values that gives a fair enough depth-of-field,because of the focusing weekness also.
The aperture values were 7.1/10.0/7.1/8.0 for each one of them.I've used the Tv mode,no exposure compensation.

If the weather was sunny that day,maybe the camera with this lens could not give a single properly focused picture.

I do not downloaded than hacked firmware.Where can i find it?Does somebody use it already?Do we have some feedback?

YankeeMom

6th of October 2009 (Tue), 16:27

hmm mine dont come out as clear as those....what settings u guys mainly use?

Also have u downloaded the new hacked firmware for 3200iso and spot metering??

I posted my settings, but I will say that I always do a little PP on ALL my photos -- no more with this lens. I don't use it very often, but when I do I am always pleasantly surprised by the pictures (again, mine is NOT an IS!) :)

Mart_73

6th of November 2009 (Fri), 05:23

A few shots with mine:

f/5.6 @ 75mm - Canon 450d -
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3481/4071437032_9165482f05_o.jpg

another @ f/5.6 - 75mm
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2786/4070674369_4ce74f12fa_o.jpg

f/6.3 @ 300mm
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2688/4070672605_c6e8d20351_o.jpg

jaskel

6th of November 2009 (Fri), 06:01

what editing software u using?

Mart_73

6th of November 2009 (Fri), 06:26

They are all raw files tweaked & converted in lightroom.

Boomerbsg

23rd of November 2009 (Mon), 05:29

heres a few of my favs from this lens...
from the texas Renaissance festival.
http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/8466/img0088yo.jpg

http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/1686/img0150of.jpg

http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/6692/img0293r.jpg

http://img410.imageshack.us/img410/1241/img0404i.jpg
http://img695.imageshack.us/i/img0088yo.jpg/

Youngback

4th of December 2009 (Fri), 15:09

Unprocessed at 300mm. f/5.6. Can't remember for the life of me what the ISO and shutter speed were at. I believe I would have used 1/300sec. White balance AWB.

YankeeMom

4th of December 2009 (Fri), 17:12

Unprocessed at 300mm. f/5.6. Can't remember for the life of me what the ISO and shutter speed were at. I believe I would have used 1/300sec. White balance AWB.

Nice, esp. considering no processing! Your stats are: 1/320 second, ISO 500. :)

Youngback

4th of December 2009 (Fri), 22:26

Haha thanks! Her (as I recently discovered) price for staying still was a handful of already opened peanuts. The lens has limits but it has worked very well for me.

YankeeMom

5th of December 2009 (Sat), 09:32

Haha thanks! Her (as I recently discovered) price for staying still was a handful of already opened peanuts. The lens has limits but it has worked very well for me.

That can be a tough shot, too -- those animals are so skitterish. I don't need to use my long lens very often, but when I do, I am often pleased. :)

hairy_moth

8th of January 2010 (Fri), 14:40

MPCman

9th of January 2010 (Sat), 06:35

I just noticed this thread. And even though this lens is next on my upgrade list, I have gotten some acceptable shots w/ it. She was on her way to first. This was taken at 300 mm -- which I normally try to stay away from.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2792/4257667444_6a2018a190_b.jpg

EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
ISO:400
f/5.6
1/640
Digital Rebel D300

Nice shot :)

Too bad it's in the wrong topic though :p This thread is for the non-IS version, your pic belongs in this thread:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=146426

;)

hairy_moth

9th of January 2010 (Sat), 08:46

Thanks!

I don't think there is a thread specifically for my old discontinued lens.

My lens in not the 70-300, but the old 75-300:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-75-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

For what it'd worth though, I never have IS on when taking sports shots. :)

Nice shot :)

Too bad it's in the wrong topic though :p This thread is for the non-IS version, your pic belongs in this thread:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=146426

;)

krdshrk

18th of January 2010 (Mon), 10:17

Only processing done was the white balance and exposure:

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y82/krdshrk/CJPatrickWedding/CRW_6947.jpg
Digital Rebel (EOS 300D)
Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6
f/4.5
ISO 100

YankeeMom

1st of February 2010 (Mon), 09:50

Still impressed. :):

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2733/4319973399_9fe1cc8a9a.jpg

hsmoscout

1st of March 2010 (Mon), 21:35

I have the non-USM version and got it for like $50 with my camera, and I have to say it's decent for that price. Yeah, it's not an L, but it gives you decent reach.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2740/4390578221_fa6846b95e.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4025/4391347154_a98c02338b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4072/4301815229_4c4721637e.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4071/4301815591_e2d3d42e30.jpg

Ed Harp

12th of April 2010 (Mon), 19:55

There's some bad PR out there on this lens. But there's some good stuff on this lens too. I've had mine for many years; the moment I got back exposures I was amazed. It was so much better than the optics of my FD lenses. Canon 75-300mm IS - data: 1/800, 300mm, f/9

2nd photo - 100% magnification

Ed Harp

12th of April 2010 (Mon), 20:10

Canon 75-300 IS USM; data: 180mm, f/14, 1/100 sec. I decided to post photos of the IS version of the 75-300 USM IS since I didn't find that lens in the list in this forum.

Techuser

12th of April 2010 (Mon), 21:44

Ed there isnt a 75-300 IS
you either talking about the 70-300 IS or the 75-300 (non IS)

Ed Harp

13th of April 2010 (Tue), 00:57

Ed there isnt a 75-300 IS
you either talking about the 70-300 IS or the 75-300 (non IS)

Techuser,

There most definitely is a Canon 75-300 IS USM Canon zoom. In fact it was the first IS lens released into the public. It has been discontinued since the EF 70-300 IS lens was released a few years ago. To see one click here: 75-300 lens (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Other/Canon-Lens-Size-Comparison.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-75-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx&usg=__iBRhU3QZ04L4mhN90NyGyZXG89E=&h=303&w=525&sz=26&hl=en&start=1&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=qASXgg3REb0i6M:&tbnh=76&tbnw=132&prev=/images%3Fq%3D75-300%2BIS%2BCanon%2Blens%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26clien t%3Dsafari%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Den%26tbs%3Disch:1).

ferretkingdom

13th of April 2010 (Tue), 21:37

Ed Harp

14th of April 2010 (Wed), 00:46

I have a 75-300 and I'm unsure which version it really is. It's non-IS, and I think it says III on it, so Mark III. Is this the USM version? it doesn't say USM anywhere on the lens. It is a soft lens, definitely not a sharp copy that I have! It does, however, give me a slightly longer reach over the 55-250, and it was super cheap. LOL. I'd rather have a soft picture of some memory than no picture at all.

The 75-300 III (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-75-300mm-f-4-5.6-III-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) is a cheap lens and most reviews indicate that.Does it say Ultrasonic above the silver band? If so then it is USM. You might not have the sharpest photos, but you'll have great memories that most point and shoots cannot deliver.

ferretkingdom

14th of April 2010 (Wed), 00:54

The 75-300 III (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-75-300mm-f-4-5.6-III-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) is a cheap lens and most reviews indicate that.Does it say Ultrasonic above the silver band? If so then it is USM. You might not have the sharpest photos, but you'll have great memories that most point and shoots cannot deliver.

Nope, it doesn't say ultrasonic on it anywhere. It just has the plain silver band, and says "Canon zoom lens EF 75-300 1:4-5.6 III". Either way, i'd rather have this than nothing at all, sharp or not!

Is there a lens thread dedicated to the non-is/non-USM version it appears I have? I couldn't find one. :/

Andy_Cam

25th of April 2010 (Sun), 06:47

I used one of these today for the first time. My 70-200 is on order still and I needed the reach, so borrowed by father in laws lens.

Overall, I am impressed! It might not be the sharpest lens, and the focussing definitely struggled at times (I was shooting 3-4 year olds playing football), but with a small amount of PP, I am happy with the shots that I got. My 24-105 just was not getting me close enough.

For somebody with a tight budget, this is definitely worth considering IMHO.

ComeBack

24th of May 2010 (Mon), 00:41

Here are 2 of my photos that I could find with this lens. Not my favorite but you can get some decent shots.

http://i247.photobucket.com/albums/gg138/My8DriftsMe/Random/IMG_5187.jpg

http://i247.photobucket.com/albums/gg138/My8DriftsMe/Random/IMG_5172.jpg

ComeBack

20th of June 2010 (Sun), 16:20

My friends Graduation

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4033/4699116254_a17b9d7f0b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4048/4699113562_df19bcd7ef.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4069/4699116802_c1a15e1bcc.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4030/4715606449_a317d866de.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4054/4716248138_f14fdacb59.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4025/4715605381_6a8565bafa.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4018/4716246974_cd88c790ec.jpg

marilyn66

22nd of June 2010 (Tue), 04:57

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1025/4723440477_3e6df163d8.jpg

DirePenguin

11th of August 2010 (Wed), 14:42

Mine came as part of a bundle with my T2i from HHGregg. I've had some decent results shooting RAW and processing in DPP. A downy woodpecker at one of my suet feeders:
http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t122/DirePenguin2007/Nature/IMG_0505.jpg

NKY Shooter

4th of September 2010 (Sat), 09:08

jsimbol

4th of September 2010 (Sat), 20:08

I just picked up the EF 75-300 USM Ultrasonic. After reading all of the reviews I am starting to second guess the decision on buying it. I basically need a longer zoon for outdoor high sun peewee football games. The nice thing about smaller kids is they dont move as fast as highschool/college or pro's.

Im off today to try it out with the XTi body. I will post a few photos soon of my results.

Looking forward to seeing what you get. As long as you got good light, you should get decent results, the extra 100mm on the long end does sometimes help. While it may seem inferior compared to other lenses, you can still get great images, just takes a little more work :D

I'm visiting the San Diego Wild Animal Park today and used the 75-300 a lot, i'll also post some results when I get home.

AntonLargiader

20th of October 2010 (Wed), 06:02

Edit: this is specifically about the Mk III USM non-IS lens. I get the impression that isn't true for all of the posts in this thread.

It's really key to immobilize this lens when shooting for detail at 300mm, and mine (just got it as kit) seems to front-focus a bit. When the weather improves I'll try some manual focus shots. Apologies in advance; these are not artistic I'm just trying to learn how to get detail with this lens. Unprocesssed. Suggestions are welcome!

I stopped down in each case to sharpen the image which really helps. And the camera was on the railing of the deck to stabilize it, which is a bit of a pain since the whole end of the lens rotates to focus (getting a good tripod today). Locked the mirror up and used the 2-second timer.

For some reason PS is stripping the EXIF. :(

This is about 55' away at 300mm with a 100% crop of the sharpest area which seems to be the foreground.
f/6.3, 1/40 sec, 400 ISO
http://www.largiader.com/samples/veronica.jpg
http://www.largiader.com/samples/veronica-crop.jpg

This is about 230' away. The letters on the junction box are 1/2" tall on the bottom and 1/4" tall on top.
f/6.3, 1/200, 800.
http://www.largiader.com/samples/telephone.jpg
http://www.largiader.com/samples/telephone-crop.jpg

AntonLargiader

20th of October 2010 (Wed), 08:34

Does it say Ultrasonic above the silver band? If so then it is USM. ...

Mine has ULTRASONIC by the band and also USM in red letters at the end of the designation, exactly like the picture in the review you linked to.

CANON ZOOM LENS EF 75-300mm 1:4-5.6 III USM

When was this lens introduced? I can't find a dated review although I read some posts indicating it was within the last month or two.

jsimbol

20th of October 2010 (Wed), 11:31

When was this lens introduced? I can't find a dated review although I read some posts indicating it was within the last month or two.

This website states that it was marketed April 1999. So it has been out for quite some time now.

Here are some of the pics from the trip to the Wild Animal Park I never posted up! :)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4124/4998924069_f6ae3c33b4_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsimbol/4998924069/)
Naptime for the Meerkat (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsimbol/4998924069/) by j.simbol (http://www.flickr.com/people/jsimbol/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/4999553458_e907ce8a42_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsimbol/4999553458/)
Hopping Away (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsimbol/4999553458/) by j.simbol (http://www.flickr.com/people/jsimbol/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4113/4999538486_ab6b86f475_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsimbol/4999538486/)
Taking Shelter from the Heat (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsimbol/4999538486/) by j.simbol (http://www.flickr.com/people/jsimbol/), on Flickr

AntonLargiader

20th of October 2010 (Wed), 14:36

Are you talking about the same lens I am? The $200 non-IS Mk III? If so, I want to know how you got such great pics! Numbers please!

hairy_moth

20th of October 2010 (Wed), 14:47

Are you talking about the same lens I am? The $200 non-IS Mk III? If so, I want to know how you got such great pics! Numbers please!

This long discontinued lens: Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-75-300mm-f-4-5.6-is-usm-lens-review.aspx) was introduced long ago, perhaps 1999.

This lens: Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-75-300mm-f-4-5.6-III-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) is much newer. It shares the same optics, but has a cheaper build and no IS.

There is yet another lens in this family: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-is-usm-lens-review.aspx) that shares about the same build quality of the original 75-300mm IS, but has improved optics, IS and focus.

I suspect jsimbol is using the first.. which is optically no better than the III.

I had the first (still do actually). I occasionally got really great shots with it, even wide open at 300mm -- though my results were inconsistent (which doesn't make sense to me). I found I got consistently better results if I kept it no longer than about 250mm and stopped down to f/8.

BTW.. There is no thread for pictures taken with the first: Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM.

jsimbol

20th of October 2010 (Wed), 15:46

Thanks,

For those shots I was actually using the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III.
So I do not have the USM nor the IS model, and yes it is the Mark III.
Found here on Amazon for around $150 (http://www.amazon.com/Canon-75-300mm-4-5-6-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B00004THD0/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1287607716&sr=8-4)
As for numbers, you can click on the pictures and see the EXIF on my flickr site, but I normally stopped down some from wide open, used a high enough shutter speed to eliminate camera shake, and used Lightroom to post process them.

Stopping down and keeping away from 300 does help, I agree completely. I also find post processing key to pics with this lens.

AntonLargiader

20th of October 2010 (Wed), 16:13

Thanks. The EXIF isn't coming through for me BTW. I get:

EXIF string not detected: 0x58 0x4d 0x50 0x0 0x3a 0x2f
End of APPx data blocks reached.
Status = -3

Unable to extract some or all of the EXIF data, which may have been removed from the image file.

AntonLargiader

20th of October 2010 (Wed), 16:16

This long discontinued lens: Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-75-300mm-f-4-5.6-is-usm-lens-review.aspx) was introduced long ago, perhaps 1999.

This lens: Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-75-300mm-f-4-5.6-III-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) is much newer. It shares the same optics, but has a cheaper build and no IS.

There is yet another lens in this family: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-is-usm-lens-review.aspx) that shares about the same build quality of the original 75-300mm IS, but has improved optics, IS and focus.

And it seems there is a non-USM version!

jsimbol

20th of October 2010 (Wed), 18:14

Oh I see, clicking the photograph, should take you to my flickr site, and it has the numbers on there.

And to help you out, here are the links to the EXIF data on my flickr site
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsimbol/4998924069/meta/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsimbol/4999553458/meta/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsimbol/4999538486/meta/

is that what you were looking for?

AntonLargiader

22nd of October 2010 (Fri), 06:11

Absolutely! Thanks for the tip.

So, it doesn't take much backing off on the zoom to get pretty nice results. Here's an intermediate range one with a 100% crop, on a tripod from maybe 5 feet away. As sharp as it is, you can still see a tiny bit of camera shake in the whiskers. (EDIT: OK, maybe that is from expecting a cat to be still for 1/25 second).

However, I have to say the bokeh is far from great.

f/10, 1/25, 160mm, 800
http://www.largiader.com/samples/veronica2.jpg
http://www.largiader.com/samples/veronica2-crop.jpg

EvenBid50

10th of November 2010 (Wed), 10:19

AntonLargiader

10th of November 2010 (Wed), 10:30

How Could you have improved this shot? just wondering

Do you mean if I'd had a 'better' lens? The sharpness is all I ever need, but an IS lens would have been that sharp hand-held. Otherwise there's the glass quality; I suppose better glass would give me more clarity (this might be a bit dull) but I also could have shot in RAW and done some PP on it (although I wouldn't have sharpened it).

How else do you mean improved on?

EvenBid50

10th of November 2010 (Wed), 17:39

Do you mean if I'd had a 'better' lens? The sharpness is all I ever need, but an IS lens would have been that sharp hand-held. Otherwise there's the glass quality; I suppose better glass would give me more clarity (this might be a bit dull) but I also could have shot in RAW and done some PP on it (although I wouldn't have sharpened it).

How else do you mean improved on?

yea i meant without any equipment change. I run into same probs and was asking honestly. would IS have elimimated that whisker action? I Just downloaded GIMP. I gotta get familiar with some PP

AntonLargiader

10th of November 2010 (Wed), 17:53

Aha. Wasn't clear what you meant.

I don't know what else I could have done. I was on a tripod, mid-zoom, mid-aperture, mirror lock, 2-second delay, pop-up flash, the whole nine yards. It was a slow shot so I probably could have opened up a stop and gained a bit of shutter speed, but as mentioned this lens really wants a lot of light.

The blurred whisker could have been movement on the cat. A faster shutter would have helped, but of course I'd need a bit more aperture and/or ISO.

GJim

2nd of January 2011 (Sun), 11:27

This long discontinued lens: Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-75-300mm-f-4-5.6-is-usm-lens-review.aspx) was introduced long ago, perhaps 1999.

BTW.. There is no thread for pictures taken with the first: Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM.

Earlier than '99 - I purchased mine Spring of '96. It hadn't been out very long at that point, though - perhaps 6 months at the most.

I still proudly own that lens. Sounds like later iterations aren't as great.

Here's an image shot this past May, with this lens:
http://wyomerc.com/photography/misc/2010/2010_05_23/20100523_IMG_0038B3WM.JPG

Endemic

8th of February 2011 (Tue), 16:26

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5096/5422258082_1ccdbdf2f5_z.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5292/5419947610_d3752ba2f9_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5135/5422258320_8031f6726b_z.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5093/5421652125_6389f3aa56_z.jpg

WingsofFury

13th of March 2011 (Sun), 10:33

A trio of aviation examples using the 75-300, one of a C-5 Galaxy and a CC-150 Polaris refueller using my old 350D and one of a CH-146 Griffon (Canadian Forces) using my newly purchased 7D. Mild post processing done with DPP and exif data post above each of them.

C-5 Galaxy - shot in AV Mode - F/4.5 @ 105mm - ISO 100

http://i460.photobucket.com/albums/qq326/WingsofFuryPhotography/Misc%20Military/IMG_3986.jpg

CC-150 Polaris Refueller - AV Mode - F/4.0 @ 75mm - ISO 200

http://i460.photobucket.com/albums/qq326/WingsofFuryPhotography/Misc%20Military/IMG_4136.jpg

Shot w/ new 7D - CH-146 Griffon - TV Mode - 1/160 @ 135mm - ISO 100

http://i460.photobucket.com/albums/qq326/WingsofFuryPhotography/Misc%20Military/IMG_0127.jpg

sudipto_roy

13th of March 2011 (Sun), 11:44

This lens is fine when there is a lot of sunlight and contrast is high. Otherwise it produces very dull images.

coirchlid

19th of March 2011 (Sat), 05:09

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5059/5539044947_6019ed6490_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/cyanea_gw/5539044947/)
EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM (no filter) + 7D + tripod + Lr3

I got this lens nearly a decade ago for a Christmas present, so really don't want to sell it. I just recently sold my EF-S 55-250 so my ol' 75-300 will now see much more use instead of being a mere museum piece.

coirchlid

20th of March 2011 (Sun), 15:58

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5016/5544412390_e9d54c854b_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/cyanea_gw/5544412390/)
300mm 1/125 (tripod) ISO100 f/8

macroimage

20th of March 2011 (Sun), 17:14

Here is one taken with my Rebel XT and the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM. It isn't a great lens but I often keep it in the trunk of the car as I don't like getting caught without a telephoto. At least the lens is very light and compact. With this lens, the more I stop down the better and I use DxO Optics Pro lens corrections to tame the chromatic aberration, purple fringing, distortion, and sharpness issues.

I had gone for a walk and put the lens on the camera and I suddenly saw this owl fly up from the shrubbery along the path.

300mm, 1/800s, f/10, ISO 200, lens hood, Hoya UV filter.

geek34

14th of April 2011 (Thu), 09:24

my first time to use this lens after a month of resting in my bag lol.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5108/5618136124_3f48f0e409_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5618136124/)
Moonlight at Night (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5618136124/) by neil lumangtad (http://www.flickr.com/people/neillumangtad/), on Flickr

photo kid

15th of April 2011 (Fri), 06:23

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5066/5618381533_9d636578c7_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/robertlangphotography/5618381533/)
Bottlenose Dolphin (http://www.flickr.com/photos/robertlangphotography/5618381533/) by Robert Lang Photography (http://www.flickr.com/people/robertlangphotography/), on Flickr

photo kid

15th of April 2011 (Fri), 06:25

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5055/5505392328_45d69b283d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/robertlangphotography/5505392328/)
Breathe (http://www.flickr.com/photos/robertlangphotography/5505392328/) by Robert Lang Photography (http://www.flickr.com/people/robertlangphotography/), on Flickr

geek34

23rd of April 2011 (Sat), 20:42

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5222/5648189578_2d7c4488f0_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5648189578/)
A Walk along the road (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5648189578/) by 35Geek35 (http://www.flickr.com/people/neillumangtad/), on Flickr

geek34

25th of April 2011 (Mon), 21:39

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5223/5655278824_ec6b25e523_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5655278824/)
IMG_0512 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5655278824/) by 35Geek35 (http://www.flickr.com/people/neillumangtad/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5141/5654703847_7081e2558e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5654703847/)
IMG_0488 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5654703847/) by 35Geek35 (http://www.flickr.com/people/neillumangtad/), on Flickr

geek34

6th of May 2011 (Fri), 14:26

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5021/5693294445_e627d10731_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5693294445/)
IMG_0217 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5693294445/) by 35Geek35 (http://www.flickr.com/people/neillumangtad/), on Flickr

geek34

9th of May 2011 (Mon), 11:35

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5222/5692612040_6eaf201e7b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5692612040/)
IMG_0601-2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5692612040/) by 35Geek35 (http://www.flickr.com/people/neillumangtad/), on Flickr

Bennis

23rd of May 2011 (Mon), 07:36

I found that there is not a thread for the 75-300 f4-5.6 III Non USM, so I guess this is the closest. This lens came with my 1000d kit.

My keeper to garbage ratio favours the latter however I have got some nice shots from it, although I hardly ever use it.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5150/5679449211_b7ff56bb19_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5679449211/)
Supermoon 2011 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5679449211/) by Ben Isaac (http://www.flickr.com/people/phenom37/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5029/5676124214_43aef29f1e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5676124214/)
White Tiger (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5676124214/) by Ben Isaac (http://www.flickr.com/people/phenom37/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5142/5675625243_e13773ca17_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5675625243/)
Dreamworld (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5675625243/) by Ben Isaac (http://www.flickr.com/people/phenom37/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5107/5676201854_9271342c6e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5676201854/)
Eastern Water Dragon (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5676201854/) by Ben Isaac (http://www.flickr.com/people/phenom37/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5102/5678958557_ef1d71c20b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5678958557/)
Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5678958557/) by Ben Isaac (http://www.flickr.com/people/phenom37/), on Flickr

geek34

23rd of May 2011 (Mon), 09:23

those were awesome shots ben.

since this is the only superzoom lens i have i still loving it :)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3478/5692614918_cb71e677bd_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5692614918/)
IMG_0625-2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neillumangtad/5692614918/) by 35Geek35 (http://www.flickr.com/people/neillumangtad/), on Flickr

08photog

19th of June 2011 (Sun), 15:56

Glad I found this thread. I thought it was me.:D Now I know it's not, it"s canon's worst zoom lens. I have always been frustrated, it always seems soft, autofocus hunts on a regular basis. Missed alot of shots. I have tried shooting RAW and pp'ing it but I was never happy. It was a hand me down from my brother along with an Xti when he upgraded. So the price was right.
But sometimes a get a good one like this.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5143/5831306836_64b6321041_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/08photog/5831306836/)
gopher (http://www.flickr.com/photos/08photog/5831306836/) by 08photog (http://www.flickr.com/people/08photog/), on Flickr

I get alot like this as well. Soft and really ugly Bokeh (imo)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5237/5837367685_3d7497432a_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/08photog/5837367685/)
Cedar Waxwing (http://www.flickr.com/photos/08photog/5837367685/) by 08photog (http://www.flickr.com/people/08photog/), on Flickr

WilliamHouser

28th of June 2011 (Tue), 10:08

Wow lol, a lot of hate for this lens, I just recently picked one up, I think the lens is pretty nice personally (though I am a beginner with only 3 1/2 years of hobby shooting under my belt), here are a few shots I got yesterday...

1.
http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w23/EJ8_2000/IMG_4470.jpg
2.
http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w23/EJ8_2000/IMG_4479.jpg
3.
http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w23/EJ8_2000/IMG_4422.jpg

BTW..since i'm new here...HELLO haha.

nrowensby

9th of July 2011 (Sat), 17:13

Wow... I didn't think the lens was THAT bad...

Jetmech1

9th of July 2011 (Sat), 17:42

I have been using this lens since 2004. It is not as bad as people say. Just have to know its limitations.

Bennis

9th of July 2011 (Sat), 18:26

I sold this lens a while ago and borrowed my friends yesterday, the lens can produce Ok Images after a bit of PP (ive found mainly contrast and curves).. no matter what I do, no matter what setting or mode even the green box, both my old and my friends copy of this lens produce garbage pictures SOOC. The AF is also extremely slow and completely useless for sports.

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6002/5917858102_50e24b4e88_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5917858102/)
Pelican (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5917858102/) by Ben Isaac (http://www.flickr.com/people/phenom37/), on Flickr

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6005/5917854886_4bc811a483_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5917854886/)
Curious Pelicans (http://www.flickr.com/photos/phenom37/5917854886/) by Ben Isaac (http://www.flickr.com/people/phenom37/), on Flickr