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 04 Apr 2013 (Thursday) 22:53
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

how do you like your 70-300L on 5d3 and.....

 
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,082 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 423
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 05, 2013 10:43 |  #16

Christina.DazzleByDesi​gn wrote in post #15792992 (external link)
Every zoom has distortion especially on FF - I never find the distortion from this lens that noticible, and its easily corrected.

do you use LR 4?


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
mike1812
Senior Member
337 posts
Likes: 62
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Houston, TX
     
Apr 05, 2013 10:45 |  #17

I know your question was directed elsewhere, but yes, I use LR4 to correct distortion on my 70-300L


EF 135L | EF 70-300 L | ST-E3-RT | (4) Einstein E640s | Sekonic L-758 | Sony A7RII Gripped | Sony A7RIII Gripped | Sony 16-35GM | Sony FE 55 f/1.8 | Sony FE 85 f/1.4 GM | Sony FE 100-400GM | Sony 1.4x | Sony HVL-60M | Sigma MC-11 | Flashpoint Xplor AD600 | Flashpoint AD200 (2)| Flashpoint AD360 | plus too many doodads to list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,082 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 423
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 05, 2013 10:47 |  #18

w0m wrote in post #15793124 (external link)
As a 6D owner; I'm actually in a somewhat similar situation, looking for wildlife/travel tele.

My mental debate is between a prime (Scares me somewhat that I'll rarely use it), 70-200 f/4 is + 1.4tc; 70-300(L or non L), or 100-400. Basically I just want to encourage more people to post their experience/opinions as I subscribe.. :) I will admit to hesitance in getting a giant white lens also. I'd generally prefer something a bit more low-key (200 f/2.8 prime + 1.4 or 2x tcs?)

a giant white lens isn't a good travel solution, and I've been to Africa and katmai. if I were going to Hawaii for a week my dilemma is should I bring the 100-400L or not? i'm thinking if I have the 70-300L i'll just take it on trips that are non-wildlife specific. also a prime like the 200L and teleconverters just isn't something i'm going to take on a vacation. I prefer the 100-400L.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,082 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 423
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 05, 2013 10:52 |  #19

mike1812 wrote in post #15793600 (external link)
I know your question was directed elsewhere, but yes, I use LR4 to correct distortion on my 70-300L

great. so do you see more distortion with the 70-300L vs 70-200L?


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,082 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 423
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 05, 2013 11:01 |  #20

Scott M wrote in post #15793271 (external link)
I agree with pdrober2's comments on the 70-300 IS non-L. That lens is not anywhere near in the class of the others you are considering. I owned one quite a few years ago, and found both the image quality and auto focus performance lacking.

I currently own both the 70-200 f/4 IS and 100-400L. I bought the 70-200 long before the 70-300L was available, so that lens was not an option at the time, but I probably would have strongly considered it had it been available.

Giving up the 100-400L is not an option for me, as it has one very important feature lacking in the others -- 400mm of reach. This is my "go to" wildlife lens, and I need the extra reach for that purpose.

The 70-200 f/4 IS is more of a general purpose lens I use when I want to travel lighter, do not need the added reach, or need something a little faster. A 1.4x TC works fine for my purposes with this lens for the few times I may need a little more reach when using it. Since I already owned the lens when the 70-300L hit the market, I couldn't justify upgrading based on my uses.

The 70-200 is a terrific lens -- the best zoom lens I have owned. It's image quality is stellar, and the AF performance is excellent. The 100-400L is quite good in both those areas, too, but just not as good as the 70-200. The image stabilization system on the 70-200 is a major improvement over the very old, outdated IS on the 100-400L.

I agree with everything you've written, and I love the 70-200L f4 IS to death. I was an early adopter and defender of this lens :D. everything I've read about the 70-300L, though, leads me to believe that optically it is at least as good and the IS is a hair better.

the drawbacks of the 70-300L are weight and variable aperture. having just moved from the 1ds mark III to the 5d3 just bought me at least 1.5 stops of higher ISO so the variable aperture really shouldn't be an issue, and I am used to the 100-400L.

cost to upgrade after I sell the 70-200L f4 IS + TC is about $250, which I can handle.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike1812
Senior Member
337 posts
Likes: 62
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Houston, TX
     
Apr 05, 2013 11:01 |  #21

^Sorry Ed, guess you missed my first post. I've never owned or shot the 70-200L - that was my caveat to my first reply here. Can only give you perspective on the 70-300L. Hopefully Christina can answer your question.


EF 135L | EF 70-300 L | ST-E3-RT | (4) Einstein E640s | Sekonic L-758 | Sony A7RII Gripped | Sony A7RIII Gripped | Sony 16-35GM | Sony FE 55 f/1.8 | Sony FE 85 f/1.4 GM | Sony FE 100-400GM | Sony 1.4x | Sony HVL-60M | Sigma MC-11 | Flashpoint Xplor AD600 | Flashpoint AD200 (2)| Flashpoint AD360 | plus too many doodads to list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike1812
Senior Member
337 posts
Likes: 62
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Houston, TX
     
Apr 05, 2013 11:05 |  #22

ed rader wrote in post #15793617 (external link)
a giant white lens isn't a good travel solution, and I've been to Africa and katmai.

Easily solved:
http://www.lenscoat.co​m …70300mm-f456l-p-1360.html (external link)


EF 135L | EF 70-300 L | ST-E3-RT | (4) Einstein E640s | Sekonic L-758 | Sony A7RII Gripped | Sony A7RIII Gripped | Sony 16-35GM | Sony FE 55 f/1.8 | Sony FE 85 f/1.4 GM | Sony FE 100-400GM | Sony 1.4x | Sony HVL-60M | Sigma MC-11 | Flashpoint Xplor AD600 | Flashpoint AD200 (2)| Flashpoint AD360 | plus too many doodads to list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,082 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 423
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 05, 2013 11:05 |  #23

mike1812 wrote in post #15793570 (external link)
Like others, I find the distortion on the 70-300L easily corrected in post. Out of the lenses I have, I find myself reaching for the 70-300L more often than any other. It's just a fantastically sharp lens with great color. Having not used the 70-200 f4, I can't really comment on comparison.

I presume you have the Canon teleconverter? I think the only one that works with the 70-300L is the Kenko 1.4x (which I have) and I'm anxiously awaiting Canon's 5D3 firmware update to allow f8 auto-focus. Together this will be a killer combo.

no. I use a kenko. I have owned the canon and I didn't see an advantage. the kenko costs much less, fits in my front pocket and is just as sharp (at least). I haven't tried the newer canon TCs but I suspect they wouldn't be much different.

also I just dislike using TCs and much prefer native length.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,082 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 423
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 05, 2013 11:08 |  #24

mike1812 wrote in post #15793678 (external link)
^Sorry Ed, guess you missed my first post. I've never owned or shot the 70-200L - that was my caveat to my first reply here. Can only give you perspective on the 70-300L. Hopefully Christina can answer your question.

thanks Mike. I just saw that. what i'm really interested is in a distortion comparison between the two lenses because a couple of the reviews I read really emphasized that the 70-3OOL has very noticeable distortion and distortion was never a factor with 70-200L.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,082 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 423
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 05, 2013 11:09 |  #25

great white in terms of size and weight, not color :D. travel to both destinations I mentioned had very strict weight limitations.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,152 posts
Gallery: 62 photos
Likes: 232
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Apr 05, 2013 11:34 |  #26

ed rader wrote in post #15793676 (external link)
I agree with everything you've written, and I love the 70-200L f4 IS to death. I was an early adopter and defender of this lens :D. everything I've read about the 70-300L, though, leads me to believe that optically it is at least as good and the IS is a hair better.

the drawbacks of the 70-300L are weight and variable aperture. having just moved from the 1ds mark III to the 5d3 just bought me at least 1.5 stops of higher ISO so the variable aperture really shouldn't be an issue, and I am used to the 100-400L.

cost to upgrade after I sell the 70-200L f4 IS + TC is about $250, which I can handle.

The constant aperture of the 70-200 f/4 is another reason I would not give it up for the 70-300L, as I sometimes use the 70-200 indoors to shoot ice hockey, where a variable aperture (or anything slower than f/4) would not work for me.

If you do not have a need for a constant aperture and are okay with the f/5.6 at the long end, I do not see much downside in upgrading to the 70-300L. The lens is a little heavier, but is actually a little more compact when retracted, so it will take up a little less space in a travel bag.

BTW, I am an early adopter of the 70-200 f/4 IS, too, so I can understand your apprehension in giving it up after so much time.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,082 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 423
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 05, 2013 11:48 |  #27

Scott M wrote in post #15793795 (external link)
The constant aperture of the 70-200 f/4 is another reason I would not give it up for the 70-300L, as I sometimes use the 70-200 indoors to shoot ice hockey, where a variable aperture (or anything slower than f/4) would not work for me.

If you do not have a need for a constant aperture and are okay with the f/5.6 at the long end, I do not see much downside in upgrading to the 70-300L. The lens is a little heavier, but is actually a little more compact when retracted, so it will take up a little less space in a travel bag.

BTW, I am an early adopter of the 70-200 f/4 IS, too, so I can understand your apprehension in giving it up after so much time.

well what's the aperture of the 70-200L f4 IS at 300mm? at 200mm the 70-300L is f5, which is 2/3 of a stop. I can handle that with the 5d3.

the deal I was looking at is over so I have a little more time. if I get the 70-300L I want it before I go to Yellowstone in june :cry:.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,152 posts
Gallery: 62 photos
Likes: 232
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Apr 05, 2013 12:20 |  #28

ed rader wrote in post #15793842 (external link)
well what's the aperture of the 70-200L f4 IS at 300mm? at 200mm the 70-300L is f5, which is 2/3 of a stop. I can handle that with the 5d3.

the deal I was looking at is over so I have a little more time. if I get the 70-300L I want it before I go to Yellowstone in june :cry:.

In my case, it's the constant aperture that I need when shooting ice hockey, as the lighting in the arena is pretty uniform across the ice. So, I shoot manual at f/4, 1/1250 and ISO 6400. A variable aperture would mess me up when I zoomed in/out.

As I said, if that is not an issue for how you use the lens, then the 70-300L should be a good upgrade.

For Yellowstone, wouldn't you want to take your 100-400L instead? The wildlife at YNP screams for added reach. On our last visit, I had the 100-400L on a 7D and still wanted more reach at times.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,082 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 423
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 05, 2013 12:30 |  #29

Scott M wrote in post #15793932 (external link)
In my case, it's the constant aperture that I need when shooting ice hockey, as the lighting in the arena is pretty uniform across the ice. So, I shoot manual at f/4, 1/1250 and ISO 6400. A variable aperture would mess me up when I zoomed in/out.

As I said, if that is not an issue for how you use the lens, then the 70-300L should be a good upgrade.

For Yellowstone, wouldn't you want to take your 100-400L instead? The wildlife at YNP screams for added reach. On our last visit, I had the 100-400L on a 7D and still wanted more reach at times.

I would take both. I am driving. we'll always want more reach :-).


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CJSmith
Senior Member
Avatar
390 posts
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago Suburbs
     
Apr 05, 2013 14:08 as a reply to  @ ed rader's post |  #30

When I first got into this hobby, my first L lens was the 70-200 f4 IS, based on your recommendations, Ed. Eventually I sold it for a 70-200 2.8 II. But I just recently sold that for the 70-300L since I'm doing less portraits and low light stuff. I couldn't be happier.

As far as the distortion, this is not something I have noticed. I may not have the most discerning eye for it, but there has never been a time that I've used any of these 3 lenses and thought there was much noticeable distortion. And I'm shooting a lot of architecture type stuff. I do correct the little that is therein Lightroom. I went through some of my images in Lightroom from 70mm to 300mm and turned the lens correction on and off. I never saw any kind of distortion that would keep me from buying this lens.

I did write a kinda clunky "review" of it on my site. http://outofchicago.co​m/canon-70-300l-review/ (external link)


6D, Σ15 FE, 17mm TS-E, 24-105, 70-300L, 40mm 2.8, 85mm 1.8, 100L, 600EX-RT, Kenko 2X MC4, Kenko Tubes
www.OutofChicago.com:external link The Chicago Photography Experience
Flickrexternal link

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

9,048 views & 0 likes for this thread
how do you like your 70-300L on 5d3 and.....
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 Preseli
952 guests, 299 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.