Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS pros and cons

My father is planning on buying me this lens (he hasn't told me officially but I already know). so can anyone give me a quick pros and cons or a short review of this lens from those who have experience using it already? Thanks! and if it matters, I usually shoot people.

Check the fredmiranda reviews for some good feedback.

I used to own it. Nice and sharp wide open till about 220mm. Then up to 300mm it can do with being stopped down to F/8. Otherwise it's a fairly typical Canon consumer grade in terms of build (i.e. 17-85, 17-55, 28-135). The main things it has over the 55-250 are build, 300mm, and FF compatibility.

Laizen31 wrote in post #12649743
I usually shoot people.

People with a Canon 70-300mm image stabilizer lens.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

That is a great lens, check www.the-digital-picture.com
Or www.photozone.de for review.

I used to own the 70-300 and the 55-250, and much preferred the 55-250. I ended up selling the 70-200 and keeping the other lens.

Reasons? In terms of image quality (very good) and focusing speed (fairly slow), the two lenses are virtually identical. The USM on the 70-300 isn't "true" USM. However, IMHO the IS system on the 55-250 is superior - I found it to be much more effective. In addition, my 70-300 wasn't all that sharp over 250 mm, especially wide-open. And I found the additional 15 mm on the wide end of the 55-250 to be more useful than the somewhat soft 50 mm on the long end of the 70-300.

Don't get me wrong; I liked both lenses. However, there's a very significant price difference - the 70-300 is more than twice the price of the 55-250, and IMHO it's very far from being twice the lens - if, indeed, it's better at all.

If I were buying today, I'd have no hesitation in choosing the 55-250. It's a tremendous lens for the price, and performs well wide-open.

phreeky wrote in post #12649754
Check the fredmiranda reviews for some good feedback.

I used to own it. Nice and sharp wide open till about 220mm. Then up to 300mm it can do with being stopped down to F/8. Otherwise it's a fairly typical Canon consumer grade in terms of build (i.e. 17-85, 17-55, 28-135). The main things it has over the 55-250 are build, 300mm, and FF compatibility.

Another thing it has over the 55-250 is metal mount and the lens doesn't rotate when focusing (which is good if you use polarizing filters).

dfbovey wrote in post #12650221
Another thing it has over the 55-250 is metal mount and the lens doesn't rotate when focusing (which is good if you use polarizing filters).

The 70-300mm is lens does rotate, which is one thing that kept me away from it.
Have you checked out the reviews and threads here concerning the Tamron 70-300mm VC USD? I found it to be the best lens at this price point. Slightly sharper than the Canon 70-300 (definetely sharper on the edges), true USM with non rotating barrel, full time manual focusing, great is, hood included and 6 year warranty. It is one of my favorite lenses and costs less than the Canon!

Ive had my 70-300IS for a couple fo years now. I sold a 70-200 f/4 IS as i wasn't really using it much and wanted a longer FL.
Its a nice lens but like the others have said, its a bit soft and dreamy over around 220mm, although for me its more noticeable if im shooting distance shots. For closer shots even 300 seems fine. Focusing is good but slow, and ive had a few missed shots due ot it hunting and totally missing focus.

I do want to try one of the newer 55-250 Lenses, and will probably sell my 70-300IS if i find the long end is better on the cheaper lens, after all, the long end is the reason for owning it.

I've owned the 70-300 IS for about 5 years, and find it a very good lens. There's an excellent review at:

http://www.slrgear.com …ct.php/product/​253/cat/11

where they state: "Were it not for the largely plastic body construction, we'd say that Canon has mislabeled this lens: It really delivers L-glass performance. That plus a very effective image stabilization system make this an amazing bargain". I've been very satisfied with it in all respects, as the build quality is quite adequate unless you are very tough on your equipment. The review above has excellent graphs of resolution across the frame at all apertures and zoom settings: just click on it and use the sliders.
One caveat: at 300mm, it is a bit soft at f/5.6, but at f/8 sand f/11 it's quite sharp even at 300mm in my opinion and based on the charts.

HughR wrote in post #12650498
It really delivers L-glass performance.

He probably means the 17-40 f/4 then () as mine is not as good as either 2 copies of the 24-105L f/4 ive had, nor the 70-200 f/4 IS.

I believe that review was written in 2005 so i would imagine the "bargain" comments were based on not a lot more in that price range. Things have changed now and while its still a good lens there are others that are cheaper and maybe a bit better.

I would still be over the moon if i was given it as a present though.

GregoryF wrote in post #12650444
The 70-300mm is lens does rotate, which is one thing that kept me away from it.
Have you checked out the reviews and threads here concerning the Tamron 70-300mm VC USD? I found it to be the best lens at this price point. Slightly sharper than the Canon 70-300 (definetely sharper on the edges), true USM with non rotating barrel, full time manual focusing, great is, hood included and 6 year warranty. It is one of my favorite lenses and costs less than the Canon!

Ah, sorry about that. Thought it didn't. Scratch that then.