Does anybody use an EF 90-300 USM lens?

[ecobo]

I've recieved my new 300D just 3 days ago and looking for a good and non-expensive telezoom lens. I fixed my eyes on a Canon EF 90-300 USM lens and need some feedback about it.
Have to say also the EF18-55 that come with the 300D is a wonderful lens!

[ron chappel]

http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/Reviews/db_Canon_90-300_mm/a_Canon_90-300_f4.5-5.6.html

That's a link to a (rather thorough) test someone did on one.Judging by what he wrote the 90-300 sounds SLIGHTLY better than the 75-300.
:)

[aholman]

This lens saved my life in Antarctica when my 100-400 went bad while in Chile. It did an admirable job in good lighting and I am very pleased with my images from this trip. It is very easy to focus and I actually prefer its use to a 75-300 IS lense I have. Although I like the IS, I find the focusing to be soft compared to the 90-300. In short, it is a good value for the money and very good to use in the field as long as lighting is adequate.

[ecobo]

Thanks guys! You're realy helping me.

[theflyingkiwi]

well I can say that I have had this lense for a week now, and I have taken many shots with it and I like it.

even tho it is not a fast lense (5.6 at 300) it does a good job for what I wonted.

You see when I was looking at buying a zoom lense I didn't know how much use I would get out of it. this lense gives me the chance to find out, and it is cheap., and in my option it works well.

check out this picture that I had taken today.

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~markpc/IMG_3485.jpg

[ecobo]

Nice photo, despite it's not the sharpest photo I have seen. But in its price range it performs quite well. I'll buy one soon and will post some test photos on my web site. I'll let you know.

[ron chappel]

that pic looks alot like what i mostly get from the 75-300...never quite sharp but still quite nice looking

[petiot]

I have a 90-300 (and before the 75-300); this lens is light and not that big. However it is made of chip plastic (the mount as well). I found it not sharp at all and the 300mm end is simply useless.

i wouldnt pay the extra money, if i was you i would go for the 75-300. and if you can afford it, the 75-300 with IS, because f5.6 at 300 (450 with a 10D, is not usable in most cases;

Dan

[ecobo]

Dan, do you claim that the 75-300 is better than the 90-300?

[theflyingkiwi]

No, he is saying that this lense (90-300) is not worth the money.

that is where I would disagree, ture it is not the fastest lense on the planet, ture it has got a plastic mount, ture it is not the sharpest lense, but for those that are tight on the $$$, it's good value for money.

the old saying goes, you get what you pay for.

I have used this camera for a number of hours on saturday, and zoom out to 300, and so far I am happy with the results.

I know one thing for sure, I am not getting a L zoom lense unless I know that I have a ture need for it.

[petiot]

Hi again. sorry for the late response. G3User is right. i dont know if the 75-300 is better than the 90-300. i owned both and to be honext i dont see any difference except fo the zoom range, and the plastic mount of the 90-300

I dont know what the difference of price between those two lenses. What i am saying is that if this difference is significant, i would not spend more money just to get the new 90-300mm.

but i do maintin that it is worth thinking about buying the IS version

Dan

[ecobo]

See what I found on Canon's web site:
A redesigned electromagnetic diaphragm (EMD) provides an aperture which is nearly circular at the widest settings. This gives an improved out-of-focus background effect.
I intend to use this lens for portraits and if this is true, the 90-300 can be the better choice for me.

[theflyingkiwi]

you know there are better lense for portraits than this lense. You could also look at the 50mm 1.8, the lense is a prime and it is also value for money. it is also a sharp lenses.

The best thing that you can do, is see if you can borrow the lense and test it out. If you find that you don't like it then at least you have not brought it.

[ecobo]

The strange think here is the new 90-300 is cheaper than the 75-300 ???

[Tom W]

Oddly, the 90-300 lens isn't listed on Canon's web site (US anyway). Is this similar to the 100-300 USM?

[ecobo]

No, it's a different lens. Check here http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Zoom_Lenses/EF_90300mm_f4556_USM/

[Tom W]

Well, it appears that the 90-300 isn't available in the US, but we do have this 100-300 f/4.5-5.6 USM. Its pretty well liked as a midrange Canon lens:

http://www.usa.canon.com/html/eflenses/images/lenses/ef_100-300_45/ef100_300f45_56.jpg