Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 02 Aug 2017 (Wednesday) 22:46
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

What's your take on the Canon 70-300 DO?

 
Ranie ­ Dib
Senior Member
Ranie Dib's Avatar
Joined Sep 2010
San Diego, CA
Aug 02, 2017 22:46 |  #1

Tried a 70-200 F4 and a 300 f4 IS. Loved the 300, had a blast on the zoo and at th estuary near me trying to take pictures of birds. Had to return it so now I am on the hunt again. The DO seems like it is a light lens, which is a plus. Also has IS which I now consider a necessity. How about image quality and AF speed? I don't have a DO I can borrow from my friend so I can't find out myself. Looking to use it with my 1d3 for zoo pictures and on hikes looking for wildlife. The 100-400 would be ideal but it's above my price range. I can get a 70-300 DO for about 350-400.



www.raniedib.com (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Bassat's Avatar
6,281 posts
Joined Oct 2015
Bourbon, Indiana - USA
Aug 02, 2017 23:04 |  #2

Read photozone.de's review of the DO. Its selling point is size, not IQ. Have you considered the new Sigma 100-400? $799 is quite deal for that range.


Tom

LOG IN TO REPLY
Ranie ­ Dib
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Ranie Dib's Avatar
Joined Sep 2010
San Diego, CA
Post has been edited 2 months ago by Ranie Dib.
Aug 02, 2017 23:11 as a reply to Bassat's post |  #3

To be honest I have not considered 3rd party lenses. Any other recommendations? I have been gone from photography for a few years so all these lenses from sigma and others are unknown to me. As long as I can get pictures from the aviary like this I am happy. Price needs to be 500 max, so I don't mind being patient and hunting for used copies.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from Ranie Dib's gallery.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from Ranie Dib's gallery.


www.raniedib.com (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Bassat's Avatar
6,281 posts
Joined Oct 2015
Bourbon, Indiana - USA
Aug 03, 2017 05:03 |  #4

Ranie Dib wrote in post #18417997 (external link)
To be honest I have not considered 3rd party lenses. Any other recommendations? I have been gone from photography for a few years so all these lenses from sigma and others are unknown to me. As long as I can get pictures from the aviary like this I am happy. Price needs to be 500 max, so I don't mind being patient and hunting for used copies.




I can't see your images; they are in a gallery I don't have set to 'SHOW'. For your budget, the new 70-300II may be an option, or the older Sigma 120-400. It is about on par with the older version of Canon's 100-400L.


Tom

LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,217 posts
Joined Aug 2007
San Jose, California
Aug 03, 2017 09:45 |  #5

I don't have the 70-300mm DO, but have shot quite a bit with another photographer who uses one. She gets very good shots with it... mostly equestrian sports, so the autofocus is up to even the most challenging tasks... always handheld, too, so the IS works well.

But, bought new it's quite expensive. In fact it's even a little more than the 70-300mm "L".

The main advantage of the DO is it's smaller size. It's about a 1.5 inches shorter than Canon's other 70-300s... when fully retracted. That might be nice for travel.

But, except for the "L", it's not any lighter weight than the other 70-300s. All three of them come in about 1.5 lb. (The "L" is about 3/4 lb. heavier, without the optional tripod ring... probably a full lb. heavier with the ring.)

The DO is also one third stop slower than the other three at the 70mm setting. It's an f/4.5-5.6 lens, while the other three are f/4-5.6.

If I were spending what these lenses cost new, I'd opt for the "L" instead, primarily because it can be fitted with a tripod mounting ring. It probably has better sealing for dust and moisture resistance, too.

$500 or less for the DO sounds tempting.... But also is a huge amount of depreciation for a Canon OEM lens that's still in production. It's a loss of almost 65% of value from the purchase price when new ($1400). In comparison, the 70-300mm "L" sells for $1350 new and around $1100 used.... Depreciation of 20% or less is a lot more typical of Canon OEM lenses. Heck, even the now-discontinued 70-300mm IS USM is seeing less depreciation, about 38% ($450 new, $280 used).

The new 70-300mm II with 4-stop IS, "Nano" USM and that spiffy LCD distance scale is selling for $450 now.

You might read the buyer reviews for the various lenses. The "DO" obviously hasn't been a big seller, introduced in 2004 it's got 75 buyer reviews at B&H Photo. Introduced a year later in 2005, the less expensive 70-300 IS USM has over 900 reviews and, intro'd 6 years later and priced similarly, the "L" has 367 reviews. Heck even the newest 70-300mm "II" IS Nano USM has over 30 reviews in less than a year.

So, I'd call it a mixed bag. The "DO" is quite capable, but also the oldest 70-300mm model Canon is offering today. The used prices are attractive and maybe it's depreciated as far as it ever will. But it's still slightly more than the latest and greatest "mid grade" model.... and it's not built or sealed like the "L", which also is the only Canon 70-300mm that can be fitted with a tripod rind.


Alan Myers "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - EXPOSUREMANAGER (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Ranie ­ Dib
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Ranie Dib's Avatar
Joined Sep 2010
San Diego, CA
Aug 03, 2017 10:29 as a reply to amfoto1's post |  #6

I was actually browsing the new 70-300 II. So many options now it seems. I would put AF performance first and IQ second. The 70-300L or the 100-400 is within reach, maybe I should just hold off in buying something "lesser" for now.



www.raniedib.com (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Bassat's Avatar
6,281 posts
Joined Oct 2015
Bourbon, Indiana - USA
Aug 03, 2017 11:32 |  #7

Ranie Dib wrote in post #18418265 (external link)
I was actually browsing the new 70-300 II. So many options now it seems. I would put AF performance first and IQ second. The 70-300L or the 100-400 is within reach, maybe I should just hold off in buying something "lesser" for now.

I do agree with you that AF is more important than IQ. Granted, we live in a world of pretty darn good glass. And an OOF photo is usually binned.

If you truly believe that AF is more important than IQ, re-consider the DO. It has a true ring-USM focus motor. As do the 70-300L and 100-400L. The Sigma has HSM (==USM), but costs more than the used DO. Take the 70-300 (not really) USM, and the 70-300 II off the table. Neither are USM. I tried using the 70-300 (non)-USM for sports. It is a pig. The II may be better, but it still ain't USM.


Tom

LOG IN TO REPLY
yellowt2
Member
185 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Aug 03, 2017 13:07 |  #8

I actually have a 70-300 DO; I got it for the size, build, good auto-focus, and IS. The image quality is not bad; it can be reasonably sharp, but does not have the best contrast (like your pictures were taken in a little bit of haze). It responds well to a little post-processing.

It is very over-priced new; if you find a good deal on a used one I would recommend it, otherwise I would say skip it and get the 70-300L or new Sigma 100-400 instead.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Ranie ­ Dib
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Ranie Dib's Avatar
Joined Sep 2010
San Diego, CA
Aug 03, 2017 13:20 |  #9

That's one of the reasons I was considering he DO. I do post processing on all the pictures I like anyway, so upping the contrast a bit won't be a problem. If the sigma Hsm is like the canon version then I will consider it too.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


www.raniedib.com (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Bassat's Avatar
6,281 posts
Joined Oct 2015
Bourbon, Indiana - USA
Aug 03, 2017 13:32 |  #10

Everything I've read about the Sigma 100-400 is good. Even focuses fast enough for birds in flight. New is $800.


Tom

LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
FEChariot's Avatar
Joined Sep 2011
Aug 03, 2017 20:22 |  #11

Ranie Dib wrote in post #18418265 (external link)
I was actually browsing the new 70-300 II. So many options now it seems. I would put AF performance first and IQ second. The 70-300L or the 100-400 is within reach, maybe I should just hold off in buying something "lesser" for now.

The DO is discontinued and getting repair parts for it will quickly become difficult. I would look at the 70-300 II instead.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Bassat's Avatar
6,281 posts
Joined Oct 2015
Bourbon, Indiana - USA
Aug 03, 2017 21:47 |  #12

FEChariot wrote in post #18418731 (external link)
The DO is discontinued and getting repair parts for it will quickly become difficult. I would look at the 70-300 II instead.

OP is interested in focus speed. The 70-300 II is not USM. Neither was the first version. The Sigma 100-400 ($800) has HSM, and has been shown to adequately track BIF.


Tom

LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
ed rader's Avatar
22,655 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined May 2005
silicon valley
Post has been last edited 2 months ago by ed rader. 2 edits done in total.
Aug 03, 2017 22:04 |  #13

if you prize size over IQ and are willing to pay a premium the DO might be for you. otherwise the 70-300L is the ticket.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com ...O-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx (external link)


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS, 100-400L II, 430exII, gitzo 3542, markins Q10, kirk, really right stuff

LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
FEChariot's Avatar
Joined Sep 2011
Aug 03, 2017 23:15 |  #14

Bassat wrote in post #18418773 (external link)
OP is interested in focus speed. The 70-300 II is not USM. Neither was the first version. The Sigma 100-400 ($800) has HSM, and has been shown to adequately track BIF.

I have to claim ignorance on both since i haven't used them but my impression from reading up on them is the new nano USM in the 70-300 II is darn near as fast as USM and as quiet as STM. Is that not the case?

Then after watching Dustin Abott's YouTube review of the Sigma 100-400 where it could not keep up with simple object moving directly at you, I dumped the idea of getting one for me. Maybe if if it's tracking a bird moving parallel to the camera where focus distance is not changing it can keep up, but what I have seen so far is that the AF tracking on the Sigma is poor at best. If you have actual reviews showing otherwise, please point me in that direction.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Bassat's Avatar
6,281 posts
Joined Oct 2015
Bourbon, Indiana - USA
Aug 03, 2017 23:17 |  #15

FEChariot wrote in post #18418815 (external link)
I have to claim ignorance on both since i haven't used them but my impression from reading up on them is the new nano USM in the 70-300 II is darn near as fast as USM and as quiet as STM. Is that not the case?
...

I've heard the same marketing schpeel. I prefer to think of it as, "Not as quiet as STM, and slower than USM." Perspective is everything.


Tom

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

2,813 views & 8 likes for this thread
What's your take on the Canon 70-300 DO?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.0012 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
Latest registered member is Mr Han
1014 guests, 482 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016