Canon Ef 75-300 DO IS USM - Worth It????

[Outdoor23]

What do guys think about the 75-300 DO IS USM. Im in the market for a lens for my rebel xt. I was torned between the 75-300 IS USM and 70-200 4L. From the reviews I've read the 75-300 IS USM is slow and picture quality is not so good, but it has IS and it is light weight. Though the 70-200 4L is a superb lens, but its too heavey to go on hiking with me, and the zoom is too low. Im seriously thinking about the 75-300 DO IS USM, I heard it is a good trade off of both, except it cost MORE than rebel XT itself. Any thoughts...??? Thanks!!!

[Radtech1]

First off, I love mine. Most usable long lens I have ever owned - and that includes the Legendary 70-200 f2.8 L. But don't take my word for it, read what Michael Reichmann (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/bangla-worked.shtml) has to say.

Rad

[JAZZ D.P.G.]

Got to say I really like mine.:D

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=66976

A posting with the 70-300 DO IS USM. Shot in RAW, processed in RawShooter and resized in PS. Minor exposure correction only. NO colour correction, NO sharpening.

Hiking and travelling (size matters) and reach were my reasons to go this route. I didn't know about this lens til I stumbled on a re-sale here (insider bought it for a friend who backed out). Read about it, bought it. Love it.

Size, reach, good AF, 2 stage IS.

Expensive? Yep. Resale value will hold though.

Worth it? ABSOLUTELY:D :D :D

[Jesper]

What do guys think about the 75-300 DO IS USM. Im in the market for a lens for my rebel xt. I was torned between the 75-300 IS USM and 70-200 4L. From the reviews I've read the 75-300 IS USM is slow and picture quality is not so good, but it has IS and it is light weight. Though the 70-200 4L is a superb lens, but its too heavey to go on hiking with me, and the zoom is too low. Im seriously thinking about the 75-300 DO IS USM, I heard it is a good trade off of both, except it cost MORE than rebel XT itself. Any thoughts...??? Thanks!!!Note: It's 70-300 DO IS USM, not 75. The cheaper telezooms start at 75, the DO starts at 70 mm.

When you think the 70-200 f/4 L is heavy, forget about the 70-300 DO, because it's heavier (705g vs. 720g according to Canon's specs).

I have the 70-300 DO and I like it - I chose it because I wanted a good quality telezoom lens, I've read many negative reports about the much cheaper 75-300 IS, and I did not want a big, heavy, much too conspicuous white L lens.