Canon 100-300 USM

[rklepper]

Anyone have first hand (not read the reviews) experience with this lense?

Thanks

Doc

[mrclark321]

I had it for a short time, pretty sharp but they seem cheap. Some of the lenses over time if held vertical will go to full extension. It's better than the 75-300.
This was taken with 100-300.

Dan

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y200/mrclark321/IMG_1425_1.jpg

[SurfKahakai]

I've had mine for a few months and it didn't give me the distance I needed for surfing pictures so I'm getting rid of it. It can be pretty sharp at 100-200mm but loses sharpness after that.

I'm selling mine for $200 if you're interested. It's in new condition because it was only used 10 times.

Here's one of my shots with it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v333/surfkahakai/10Apr1.jpg

[eos-rob-uk]

Great lens for the money (apart from the err 99 problem mine has, bought from ebay so you guess)

anyhoo better then the 75-300 USM III remains sharp up to about 200mm wide or F6.3 even sharp at F8 @300mm can be had new for around £200 UK.

Use mine for general shots but mainly motorcyle shots. f6.3 is my most common setting give sharp enough results. uses 58mm filters and not to heavy.

here is a shot @300mm F8 with my 100-300 F4.5-5.6 srtaight from my Canon 350D parameter 0 i.e. no extra in camera sharpening or saturation
need anymore, just ask

RoB B

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/bateman.family/Croft-bikes/post/test-300mm.jpg

here is a sparrow in my garden again 100% crop at f8 300mm this time with a bit or USM.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/bateman.family/Croft-bikes/post/_MG_6910.jpg

[Jack W.]

I have this lens also. Used within it's limitations, which aren't bad, it's pretty good.

Great shot of the sparrow, Rob.

Jack

[Chris G]

I got mine a few years ago when I bought my Elan. Here's a shot with it when I got my 20D.

http://911cg.myphotoalbum.com/view_photo.php?set_albumName=album02&id=Test_017

I've taken some great shots with it.

[rklepper]

Thanks everyone. I really appreciate it. It is hard to purchase a lense that will not break the bank.

Doc

[cfcRebel]

These were taken with my EF100-300mm.

[ttmatsu]

I've had mine for several years. I bought a 70-200 because I was tired of living with the limits it placed on me. You'll note that the sparrow shot was taken in very even light and in the lens's fstop sweetspot. The motorcycle shot is much more typical of everyday use where there is a fuzziness or softness in the image at 300mm. In situations where the face of a subject is in shadow, there is a marked loss of resolution in that shaded area.

As another poster stated, 100-200, the lens is pretty darn good. Nice sharpness, color/contrast. If you can swing it and the loss of 100mm doesn't hurt you too much, get the 70-200 f4L lens instead ($580 vs. $280). If the price difference is too much, I would compare the Sigma 75-300 f4.5-5.6 APO for $200 with the Canon 100-300. All the Canon 75/100-300 zooms suffer from softness on the long end. I think the Sigma is sharper on the long end but not quite as sharp as the 100-300 in the 100-200 range.

I have taken too many soft pictures at the long end of the 100-300 to be able to recommend it. I'd much rather crop a picture taken by my 70-200 then have a full sized 100-300 shot on the long end. The 100-300 has to be stopped down to f8 and even with the hood on (yes, I bought a hood for it), it doesn't do well in several lighting situations. I have not taken a picture that turned out badly with the 70-200 that was not my fault (like putting the drive mode into continuous but forgetting to set the focus mode to AI Servo and leaving it in One Shot for a moving object and getting OOF results). But I have plenty of shots with the 100-300 with either some pincushioning or just plain softness where I have to use HEAVY USM and mask certain areas for special treatment. I take about 100 shots per soccer or field hockey match my kids are in. You can tell the difference immediately between the ones taken by the 70-200 and the 100-300.

If you just print 4X6 and don't do heavy cropping, the 100-300 with some USM will probably be fine. If you print 8X10, you'll see the softness when looking at the faces. I would say the sparrow picture is an exceptional result for the 100-300 lens and the photographer can be proud to have gotten that result from this lens. Like I stated, the motorcycle picture by the same photographer is more typical. But in ending this lengthy post, let me state that it's better to have gotten the shot and done whatever to make it presentable than to not have gotten the shot at all. Some parents have been extremely happy with the prints or cds I've given them of pictures taken of our teams in action - even the ones I would label "only a parent could love this picture".

[rklepper]

the 70-200 f4L is actually fairly low priced. I purchased the 28-135 IS USM from B&H and it was 399. I really like that lens. But I had to purchase a lot of other accessories for it that are included in the 70-200 f4L.

Thanks for the suggestion, that is within my budget.

Doc

[rklepper]

Any idea on how the teleconverters affect the lens? I think I will purchase this lens over either the 100-300 or the 75-300. Later might pick up the teleconverter to get more reach.

Doc

[ron chappel]

The 100-300usm is better than the 75-300 is EVERY way.
Focus speed is dramatically faster

I did a comparison test on these (and other) lenses just recently

Look down the bottom of this folder-

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=504236

Be sure to look at the 'full frame view' image because it has some general test notes on the lenses
Once on each image page you must click the 'details' tab to see the notes for each image


If you can afford the 70-300/4L + 1.4 TC then that is a far better way to go!
The 100-300 is a very decent lens but it's not in the class of the pro lens
Here is the sort of image quality you'll get from the 70-200/4L both with and with the TC.
If you compare the 100-300usm to the 100-300/5.6L in my test then compare the 100-300/5.6L and 70-300/4L in that guys tests you can see just how much better the 70-200/4L is than the 100-300usm:)

[rklepper]

I think I am going to go ahead and get the 70-200.4L. The price is only about 140 over the 75-300 IS USM, so it is at least within reach. Plus it seems like it would be the lens for what I want to do.

Thanks for the help.

Doc

[ttmatsu]

Any idea on how the teleconverters affect the lens? I think I will purchase this lens over either the 100-300 or the 75-300. Later might pick up the teleconverter to get more reach.

Doc

A 1.4X TC would make the f4 a f5.6. Generally, you will get satisfactory results even wide open at f5.6 but it improves at f8 - f11. You will still have autofocus. The 2 TCs I would recommend are the Kenko Pro 300 1.4X DG and the Canon. You can get the Kenko for half the price of the Canon. I got mine via a Hong Kong dealer on ebay for $130 + 10$ S&H...just check the satisfaction ratings which took the worry about dealing with an overseas seller away (save about $40 - 50 over buying from a US internet dealer). To my eye, the Kenko's center sharpness with the 70-200 series is on par with the Canon. I didn't detect any difference in corner sharpness either but some claim that the Canon has better edge sharpness.

Canon L lenses hold their value very well so trying to save by getting a 2nd hand lens doesn't really save you much (unless the guy just doesn't know the value). Good luck and I know you'll be happy with the quality of the pics you get.

[rklepper]

Thanks for all the info. I will post some pics once I get the lens and the hang of using the lens.

Doc