Canon 75-300mm cheapie, any good?

[Movinfr8]

Am thinking about a long lens for hte 300 rebel, don't have an "L" budget, does anyone have pics taken with the sub $200 75-300 f4.5-6 lens? any reccomendations?
thanks,
Norm

[imjamie]

I've got the lens you're talking about and so far have no complaints about it. I do know that sometimes you'll get one that's extremely "soft", so your best bet if possible is to try it in the store before purchasing it. Here's a shot taken with it at the 300mm range on a very cloudy day. Plane was moving as well.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/imjamie56/Display%20Photos/IMG_0101a.jpg



Hope this helps you out.

Marv

[swoop1156]

I can get hte 90-300 for $230. I was considering it.

[condyk]

The best inexpensive zoom has been debated many times here and so a quick search should find lots of input. For example:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=68926

Personally, I would go for the Sigma 70-300 APO Super II first, then the Canon 100-300 USM ... I wouldn't get the 75-300 as not the best value/performance in this price range.

[cfcRebel]

Hi Norm,
I was asking about something similar yesterday. I received some good information from some nice folks in this forum. You might want to consider EF 100-300mm. I got a used one from B&H for $189 this morning.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=68926

[cmM]

Adoes anyone have pics taken with the sub $200 75-300 f4.5-6 lens? any reccomendations?
http://www.cmuntean.net/images/wildlife.html <- most taken with Canon 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM

[rdenney]

Am thinking about a long lens for hte 300 rebel, don't have an "L" budget, does anyone have pics taken with the sub $200 75-300 f4.5-6 lens? any reccomendations?
thanks,
Norm

Put one on your camera and try to take pictures with it first. I owned one for precisely one day. It was so light I could not hold it steady. The barrel is either control ring or it turns during focusing, so you can't brace it against anything. I could not even hold it steady with a monopod, because it would jiggle side to side with the monopod under the camera. In too many lighting conditions, the aperture you need to get a good image requires too slow a shutter speed for a lens of that length. I took it back the next day. I would consider a Sigma or a Tamron over the Canon in a minute if it has better ergonomics.

There's a reason this is the first non-L lens Canon offered with image stabilization. There ain't no other way to keep it still.

Do you really need 300mm? That's equivalent to nearly 500mm on a full-frame camera, which was and is pretty specialized. I think you will get a lens that's a lot more fun to use if you look for 200 at the outer end. I ended up spending more for a 70-200/4L, and though it bit into my wallet more than I wanted at the time, I've never regretted it. Later, I bought a 1.4 teleconverter, which gave me all the zoom range (and, for that matter, speed) of the 75-300 without the unacceptable handling.

Rick "old and shaky" Denney

[cactusclay]

I vote for to spend more money on the longer lenses.

[jeffherald]

I have used one for a few years now. I have been happy with it's perfomance. I haven't tried the other lenses people here have recommended. I'm sure they are good too.

Like it has been suggested, try one in the store if you have that option. I think it is a good lens for the price.

[Claire]

I just got this lens for my birthday. I was going to get the Sigma one, but my parents bought me the Canon 75-300mm as a gift, so of course I didn't say no to it. :)

I'm slowly getting used to the weight and learning to hold it more steadily. Only used it in sunny weather so far. So far I'm pretty happy with it apart from the fact that I find the barrell being annoyingly tougher to move compared to my kit lens.

[Claire]

Ok, here are two pics taken this week with the 75-300mm. Of course they've been sharpened a bit.

[cactusclay]

Actually that pic looked pretty good, how did it look before sharpening?

[Claire]

cactusclay, which one of the pics you mean? The top one I didn't sharpen that much. The bottom I sharpened more (think a bit oversharpened even).

[cactusclay]

Well, it doens't look bad to me.

[mikesd]

Looks pretty good to me also. [congrats on the 1000 post Cactus]

[2goldens]

I have the Sigma 70-300 lens and I love it. For what I used it for it worked great. I don’t use it that much now but I am glad I have it.

[mikesd]

Hi Norm,
I was asking about something similar yesterday. I received some good information from some nice folks in this forum. You might want to consider EF 100-300mm. I got a used one from B&H for $189 this morning.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=68926


Agree, the 100-300 is a much sharper and faster focusing lens than the 75-300.