Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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 28 Aug 2010 (Saturday) 14:26
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Who's getting (70-300mm L )

 
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
19,183 posts
Gallery: 58 photos
Likes: 3853
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Aug 30, 2010 19:29 |  #166

CountryBoy wrote in post #10819102 (external link)
... I see no reason Canon can't make a 100-300mm f/4 iS lens for around $2500.

The Nikon 200-400 f/4 VR is around $6000...which would be the closest comparison that is in production to a theoretical 100-300 f/4.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Aug 30, 2010 19:42 |  #167

Snydremark wrote in post #10819389 (external link)
The Nikon 200-400 f/4 VR is around $6000...which would be the closest comparison that is in production to a theoretical 100-300 f/4.

Sigma makes a 100-300mm f/4 now that goes for about $1000 . Add OS/IS and it still should go for under $ 3000 no matter who makes it . If not , it's a rip-off .

Very unlikely if I would sell mine anyway.

A 100-400mm is a whole different lense , and yes it would cost more . But I wouldn't give even close to $6000 . Those Nikon people are nuts :lol: .


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
19,183 posts
Gallery: 58 photos
Likes: 3853
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Aug 30, 2010 20:08 |  #168

CountryBoy wrote in post #10819460 (external link)
Sigma makes a 100-300mm f/4 now that goes for about $1000 . Add OS/IS and it still should go for under $ 3000 no matter who makes it . If not , it's a rip-off .

Very unlikely if I would sell mine anyway.

A 100-400mm is a whole different lense , and yes it would cost more . But I wouldn't give even close to $6000 . Those Nikon people are nuts :lol: .

Well, then I got nuthin :p


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jannie
Goldmember
4,936 posts
Joined Jan 2008
     
Aug 31, 2010 08:16 |  #169

100-400 is an excellent lens, it's really a matter of what fits your needs best.


Ms.Jannie
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it"!
1DMKIII, 85LII, 24-70L, 100-400L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
donttreadonme
Member
153 posts
Joined Mar 2010
     
Aug 31, 2010 10:53 as a reply to  @ Jannie's post |  #170

IF this lens is as sharp as the 100-400 or better and IF it is marketed with a suggested retail of ~$1500 USD I will without question own one. I had a 100-400 that I recently sold because I bought into the "it isn't sharp enough" talk and now regret it big time. This 70-300 lens however, looks very appealing to me and my needs.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ingraman
Member
169 posts
Joined Mar 2009
     
Aug 31, 2010 11:25 as a reply to  @ donttreadonme's post |  #171

For me, this better be noticibly better than the 100-400mm before I consider it. Never considered the 100-400mm to be "L" in terms of image quality (if it is, then a 55-250mm should be L as well...), so hopefully this will meet expectations.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WayneHawn
Senior Member
260 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
     
Aug 31, 2010 16:45 |  #172

You know what does crack me up a bit about this lens and the "lens positioning article?" That Canon has completely forgotten about the old 70-300IS USM:

"Until now, Canon’s long zoom lens options have meant either putting up with lots of weight (EF 100-400mm L IS), living with possibly not enough telephoto power (the 70-200mm series), or a lens that didn’t really target the advanced user (EF 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6, etc)."

Canon says that there is nothing in the gap between the 75-300 and the 70-200 series. Hello! What about the lens you just pulled off the shelves? That was a pretty darn good gap filler. They also ignore the 55-250, which I don't have experience with, but gets very good reviews.

Don't get me wrong, I still like the idea of the new L, and if it is a big enough upgrade over the old 70-300 I may get it, but come on Canon, don't just pretend that the old 70-300 did not exist.


Wayne
5d3; 24-70 2.8 Mkii; 70-200 2.8 IS Mkii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thenextguy
Goldmember
Avatar
2,576 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 8
Likes: 6093
Joined Feb 2010
Location: Las Vegas, NV
     
Aug 31, 2010 16:48 |  #173

That's true. In fact, they had TWO 70-300 lenses before this one.

By the way, it looks like the old 70-300 is back on their website. Maybe they won't discontinue it.


Steve -- Website (external link) -- Flickr (external link) -- Tumblr (external link) -- Instagram (external link) -- 500px (external link) (New!)
Canon 5Ds R | 24-70L f/2.8 II | 35 F2 IS | 50mm f/1.4 | 70-200L f/2.8 II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Aug 31, 2010 16:50 |  #174

WayneHawn wrote in post #10824991 (external link)
You know what does crack me up a bit about this lens and the "lens positioning article?" That Canon has completely forgotten about the old 70-300IS USM:

"Until now, Canon’s long zoom lens options have meant either putting up with lots of weight (EF 100-400mm L IS), living with possibly not enough telephoto power (the 70-200mm series), or a lens that didn’t really target the advanced user (EF 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6, etc)."

Canon says that there is nothing in the gap between the 75-300 and the 70-200 series. Hello! What about the lens you just pulled off the shelves? That was a pretty darn good gap filler. They also ignore the 55-250, which I don't have experience with, but gets very good reviews.

Don't get me wrong, I still like the idea of the new L, and if it is a big enough upgrade over the old 70-300 I may get it, but come on Canon, don't just pretend that the old 70-300 did not exist.

I think those are the key words .


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
msowsun
"approx 8mm"
Avatar
9,288 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 387
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Oakville Ont. Canada
     
Aug 31, 2010 16:52 |  #175

WayneHawn wrote in post #10824991 (external link)
Don't get me wrong, I still like the idea of the new L, and if it is a big enough upgrade over the old 70-300 I may get it, but come on Canon, don't just pretend that the old 70-300 did not exist.

Maybe it is because they plan to discontinue the old 70-300?


Mike Sowsun / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.8 STM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 100-400 II / EF 1.4x II
Full Current and Previously Owned Gear List over 40 years Flickr Photostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tanglefoot47
Goldmember
Avatar
2,413 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Tulalip WA about 40 miles north of Seattle
     
Aug 31, 2010 16:53 |  #176

Happy with the 100-400




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WayneHawn
Senior Member
260 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
     
Aug 31, 2010 16:57 |  #177

CountryBoy wrote in post #10825027 (external link)
I think those are the key words .

Uh oh. I DID NOT intend to start a debate about the merits of the 70-300 or what its target audience is, let alone what an "advanced user" is. There are plenty of those around already. Just an observation that in the lens positioning article it seems somewhat odd not to mention the 70-300 nonL.

I do agree that there was a need for a smaller, lighter (than the 100-400) zoom with an upper range longer than 200, which is why I am interersted in this lens for the types of shooting that I do.


Wayne
5d3; 24-70 2.8 Mkii; 70-200 2.8 IS Mkii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Project22a
Senior Member
453 posts
Joined Jul 2008
     
Aug 31, 2010 17:24 |  #178

tkbslc wrote in post #10807609 (external link)
It would be interesting to see where the aperture drops off. It could be a near replacement for the 70-200 F4 IS if that f4 makes it close to 200.

THIS.


B&W film shooter gone digital.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tom ­ s
Senior Member
Avatar
434 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2007
Location: croatia, southern europe
     
Aug 31, 2010 19:29 |  #179

It should have been 70-300 f/4.5 USM L :)


Using: Canon 70d, Canon 50d, 135 2 USM L, 50 1.8, Sigma 10 2.8 HSM EX fisheye, Sigma 180 2.8 AP✿ macr✿, Sigma 18-35 1.8 ART, Nikon D5500

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phreeky
Goldmember
3,514 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Australia
     
Aug 31, 2010 20:50 |  #180

thenextguy wrote in post #10825022 (external link)
By the way, it looks like the old 70-300 is back on their website. Maybe they won't discontinue it.

Very interesting. Looks like someone stuffed up when putting the new lens page up.




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

34,089 views & 0 likes for this thread
Who's getting (70-300mm L )
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Muffy Chao
898 guests, 253 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.