EF90-300 or EF100-300? Which one is better?

[ecobo]

Hi!
I started a conversation about the new EF90-300 at http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=26700 and have received an almost negative feedback about this lens. Now I'm looking at the EF100-300 USM lens which seems to be better. I've done a search on the Internet to find some test photos but cannot find any.
Please help me choose - which lens is better: the new EF90-300USM or the EF90-300USM? If you know about a test photos archive, please post the address.
Regards!

[ron chappel]

I remember a thread recently where lots of people defended the 90-300 !(on this forum)
Here are some links to pics on photo.sig,the only site i know that allows a search 'by lens'

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=12754

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=13308

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=13734

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=13822

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=12752

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=12753

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=12753

Hopefully you can browse them ok.that site is rather overworked these days...and i'm not sure it allows non registered users to see full size pics....?


In my opinion the 100-300 is definitely better then the 75-300.I haven't owned the 90-300 but the images from it look very similar to those i get from the 75-300.

The 100-300 should have slightly better contrast,slightly better resolution and i noticed a much gentler out of focus blur.Add to that the 100-300's focus speed, build quality and other small improvements and it is definitely better than the common consumer zooms.I notice it is also much dearer new so it may not be worth it to you.I got mine 2nd hand which is a good way to get one.
Be carefull about recomendations on this forum!There are LOTS of 'L snobs' here (as good as they are in other ways!).They just can't comprehend anyone buying anything less than the very best available
Here is a link to a very good review of the canon 90-300

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

[ecobo]

Thank you Ron!
Canon claims that the 90-300 and 75-300 have similar optics, so the image quality must be the same on both of them. But it seems to me the 75-300 (there is a lot of info about it on the Net) isn't the best choice, even for an amateur like me. A lot of folks I've asked, think that the 100-300 is better, but I want to hear more opinions...

[mttmrphy]

I should be receiving my EF100-300 USM lens tomorrow. If The weather cooperates, I will shoot with it some this weekend and post my thoughts.

[msvadi]

please, do that ;)
it would be really nice if you could post 100% crop pictures ;)

I should be receiving my EF100-300 USM lens tomorrow. If The weather cooperates, I will shoot with it some this weekend and post my thoughts.

[ecobo]

yes! it would be very helpful for the lens choice

[mttmrphy]

well I lied... I didnt order the 100-300. Talk about a brain fart.

I received my 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM today.

I havent had a chance to shoot with it yet.

[ecobo]

Well, post some 100% crops from the 75-300, please. You will help a lot of people!

[ron chappel]

Here are some pics from a 75-300 (the II usm version but thay are optically all the same)

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=368574

(i tried to get the sharpness ,colour and contrast the same as you would see in well made prints -unfortunately there is some posterization and jpeg compression artifacts from the site i post them at)

I didn't keep the 100-300 long enough to get usefull examples from it.I'll see what i can find hidden on the computer :wink:

[ecobo]

Thanks Ron!
These are very good! And the sharpness is good for a non-L lens. Did you made some USM filter?

[ron chappel]

They all had various amounts of usm,from very little to moderate amounts-all to correct for inevitable blur created by resizing or other problems which were not the fault of the lens.As i said i tried to get them exactly like they would look when printed.

I've been experimenting with different resizing methods lately and have yet to find a method that is much better than "pretty lousy"
I have several editing programs,have them set to the highest quality resampling and try different methods but still i'm not satisfied... :?