Canon Ef 75-300mm $150 Worth it?

[tpinchback]

I have heard that the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III zoom lens is not a very good lens, but I can get it new for 150 dollars. Is there somthing better for less than $300? Why do people knock this lens so bad? Im a beginner when it comes to lenses, so be easy on me.

I will be using it for everyday "stuff" nothing special.

[Kinger]

I bought one, and within the day I got it I wished I spent the extra for the IS version. Other then that I am enjoying it. Yes I know that there are better lenses, but for the beginner that know he/she will be eventually replacing the lens within a year or two, it's a good buy.

[tpinchback]

how much more is the IS version?

[Kinger]

I think it was an extra $250

[Nolz]

I bought one, and within the day I got it I wished I spent the extra for the IS version. Other then that I am enjoying it. Yes I know that there are better lenses, but for the beginner that know he/she will be eventually replacing the lens within a year or two, it's a good buy.

spot on...although it took me about a week of use to truly conclude that....yeap! dammit i should have forked out the extra $$$....but now 2 weeks on i am getting used to its little quirks, and for the money im not going to complain.

thats the thing...the original poster mentions that he is a beginner and that the lens will be for general purpose shooting etc......so i'd say that, for the price, this lens should suffice......so go for it unless you have the money to get some serious-L-y expensive gear.

[richardtallent]

At *least* get the USM version, which goes for ~$180 at B&H, and (like the other) has a $10 MIR in effect until the end of this month.

I got the non-USM (i.e., DC) version of this lens from Best Buy and it was well below my expectations. I took it back and got the USM version from B&H and it was worth the extra effort (BB was selling *above* the USM price, so it was even cheaper!).

[OviV]

I have it. I am also a beginner and I am happy with it. I know its not the best lens out there but it takes decent pictures.

Here is a example:

http://www.shareapicture.com/vsalbum/getpic.aspx?fld=\OviV\Photography\2003-12-27%20Shark%20Valley&pic=113_1368_RT8.jpg&OV=0

Ovi

[gsmx2]

I got the USM model from B&H and am very happy with the lens.

gsm x2

[sjprg]

These are all handheld with 75-300 III USM NON IS. Perfectly useable for $180.00. Don't let the "L" glass stampede you into spending a lot of money unless it will pay for itself, or you have a lot.


http://www.pbase.com/image/20333482
http://www.pbase.com/image/21594258
http://www.pbase.com/image/21594328
http://www.pbase.com/image/21594328
http://www.pbase.com/image/19341171

[tpinchback]

Sorry for asking, but what does USM stand for?

[sjprg]

USM > Ultra Sonic Motor. I assume that it is an AC motor driven at a frequency above the human hearing range. Not sure if dogs can hear it. Although the last dog I shot sure picked up his ears when I focused on him.

[KBMphotography.com]

Go for it......

For the money you won't find much better. And it is ok really. (but I love my 70-200m F2.8L IS!!!)

Seriously, I wasn't overly impressed when I borroweed the 70i300mm IS.

It wasn't bad - but I expected more.

(and I have one for sale in the UK!!)

[Tom W]

sjprg - those are some exceptionally sharp images. Both the lens and yourself did a fine job.

[ron chappel]

I have a particularly good example of this lens (after owning/using several)
.The others were just not good enough frankly!Allways softish at any aperture and focal length + low contast and saturation.
The current one i have (it's a version II but they are all the same theoretically) gets occasionally very good pics but man it makes it hard work!
Yesterday and today i went out with this lens trying to get a great example of what it can achieve.I got some pretty good ones but there are lots of throwaways!
I've found this lens rather sensitive to camera movement blur far beyond what would be indicated by the shutter speed (including the cropping factor multiple)
I'll try adding a pic...never done it on this forum yet

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2042202
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2042239
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2042257
The last shot is just a little worse than the average from this lens wide open.

[richardtallent]

I took this new lens and my 300D out today and got a few shots. Below this image is a link to the full-sized version (warning: almost 4MB and I only have about a 384Kbps upstream cable connection).

http://www.tallent.us/misc/2004-01-10-153947-small.jpg

(click for original) (http://www.tallent.us/misc/2004-01-10-153947.jpg)

1/500s, 300mm, f/5.6, ISO 200.

Minor photoshop correction: unsharpen (~ 1.6px, 30%), saturation and contrast tweaks, but the sharpness is really very good compared to the stories I had heard. Sorry, I threw away the CRW file on this one and can't post an uncorrected, but I can say that I tend to undersharpen rather to avoid that digital-sharp look (where the noise is sharp and the picture still blurry).

The autofocus seemed faster than the kit lens today, but it was slower earlier this week in poor lighting. Overall, I was very happy with the performance today, and it was the first time I really had a chance to try it. Combined with the Digital Rebel's 1.6x magnification factor, I couldn't believe how close I was able to get for under $200.

[Nolz]

heres one i took yesterday arvo in lowish light....for the money it looks ok to me :)
http://users.bigpond.net.au/Nolz/galahcocky%20fight.JPG
Tv 1/400, Av 5, ISO 200 @300mm

[ron chappel]

From the problems i have getting reasonable shots out of this lens i'm curious how the IS version would fare.
As i mention in the notes to the f5.6 bird pic-the shutter speed was 1/2000.There were no excuses for unsharpness due to camera shake...
I wonder if the lens is somehow 'whipping' i.e the lens is somehow magnifying the vibrations from the mirror/shutter?Just a weird theory

[Nolz]

I wonder if the lens is somehow 'whipping' i.e the lens is somehow magnifying the vibrations from the mirror/shutter?Just a weird theory
that thought has also crossed my mind...whether or not its what it is is another story?
perhaps somone else would liek to chime in and enlighten us?

[pompeygreg]

I have it. I am also a beginner and I am happy with it. I know its not the best lens out there but it takes decent pictures.



I too fall into the beginner category, I wanted a zoom but having invested in my first DSLR didn't have the money to spend. I am more than happy with the 75-300mm III (although my technique still needs improvement :D ). Here a couple of shots I took:

http://www.pompeygreg.btinternet.co.uk/pictures/Robin.jpg

and

http://www.pompeygreg.btinternet.co.uk/pictures/Chew_Boats.jpg

[tpinchback]

thanks for all of yalls feedback and pic's it helped me alot in my decision. Keep it coming!!! Yes I am from Texas. "yalls" lol

[ron chappel]

The one i currently have i got at a good price 2nd hand when i had not much money.If i was doing it all again paying new 'retail' price i would seriously consider the image stabilizer version.I can easily image it would double the amount of keepers

....but then the IS version is still the same soft optics and a sigma 100-300 f4 EX(?) can't be much more.....And the RAZOR sharp EF 70-200 f4 is not much more still.....aaaaahhhhh,help!