is the canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM anygood ?

[micklemuk]

is the canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM anygood ? or woul di be better getting a sigma or tamron ?

[Jon]

Which Sigma or Tamron? If you need IS at a reasonable price, the Canon is the only option. It's not a bad lens, although not in danger of being mistaken for an L.

[steibeldj]

It's not a bad lens, although not in danger of being mistaken for an L.

I have no experience with Sigma lenses, however, I was supprised after getting the 70-300 DO IS that the 75-300 IS was not all that bad optically. The IS is a great option, but I had trouble with it for kids outdoor sports at the long end (300mm) That may just be me though.

As said, it ain't 'L' glass but to get IS and this range for $400 or so, you can't beat it.

[micklemuk]

so its better then the sigma or tamron of the same focal length etc

[Medic1]

I have not seen the IS version, but if it is optically comparable the the non-IS version its a decent lens for the price. As Jon said, its definetly not going to be mistaken for L glass, but is still an affordable and decent IS

[dharris]

is the canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM anygood ? or woul di be better getting a sigma or tamron ?

I owned the 75-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM for some time. This lens produced inconsistent results, but did manage to get some great pics. I loved this lens as a long walk around lens (little heavy though). I would save a few more dollars and buy the 70-200mm f/4L USM. You loose in length, but gain consistency and quality.:lol:

[dharris]

so its better then the sigma or tamron of the same focal length etc

What are those brands??? Shame on you.

[Jon Foster]

As already stated, it's not an "L" level lens. But, considering the reach, the IS and the cost, it's a pretty decent lens. I can't afford to buy more glass right now let alone buy all L glass so for me this lens offers a lot of ability that I wouldn't other wise have available...

Check out my Photobucket galleries to see what the 75-300 IS has been able to do for me (link below).

Jon.

[Jon]

The IS is a great option, but I had trouble with it for kids outdoor sports at the long end (300mm) That may just be me though.

IS only helps dampen camera motion, it won't do anything for subject motion. And the early IS on the 75-300 (face it folks, this is a 10 year old lens) can cause problems if you ry to use it while panning. There are some complaints about the 75-300 being slow to focus; if you use it in AI Servo mode, this may aggravate the situation as well.

[Croasdail]

I use the lens with a 10d - and I get about 50% of the shots in focus. Truth in advertising here - most of these shot are late afternoon sporting shots. With the 10d it will back focus or focus in on what ever is in the background more often then I like. It very seldom hunts though. Turning IS off also helps and speeds up the lens. I did do some floral shots last week early in the morning hand holding the camera and 90% of the shots worked great at very slow shutter speeds (1/15 - 1/40th). Focus was right on.... so good for general purpose - okay for sports. On other note - it does produce great contrast and color.

As an aside - my son used it on his very cheap film Canon Rebel to take shots of some motorsports we were at and his results were spectacular - 95% in very true focus. I love the flexibility of digital but miss the stability of the film platform. But that is a discussion for another day.

[Barb42]

I found the image results with this lens inconsistant and sold it. I am going to replace it with a 70-200 2.8 IS