Showing examples of 75x300, comments, editing welcome

This is mostly, for the people, who do not own any L lenses. Who are thinking of buying something less than an L. I am starting to get some good pictures from this, Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens, so far, only inside. I still have not been able to use it, with a clear, sunny, windless blue sky day. When I do, then I will know, what it really can do, and can never do.

I already know, that I will have to replace this lens with an L, and soon, will not be soon enough. I have lots of opportunities, to take photos, during the day. I drive around our township, 36 square miles, mostly agricultural, which also includes a huge County park system, with a river that runs into a man made lake. It has White Swans, and many species of ducks, geese, and birds.

I have seen a white Red Tail Hawk, only the tail is red, it has been nesting for the last two years, only 2 miles form my house. But I have never been able to get a good still photo of it. I have it on vcr, but I want a high quality still. So, I will have to decide, what kind of lens I need to get, it seems like we only get one good sunny day, out of 13 days around here lately.

http://www.allmounts.c​om/70x300-a.html

I am not a fan of this lens. I am glad that you are happy with your results, though. I think there are lots of great lenses that are not "L" lenses. Keep shooting and posting.

It's a useful lens if you understand its limitations i.e. a bit soft at 300mm with wide open aperture. If you stick to 200mm wide open or stop down a little at 300mm it's not bad at all. AF is slow though, which is probably its biggest weakness. It's light and easy to use hand-held with IS. Below is a link to a previous thread with some pics I took with it. I've just upgraded to the 300mm F4 L IS, which sure is sharper and faster, but then again it's also a lot more money.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=122775

Well, truthfully, I am not happy with it, outside, inside, I think it has been fine, with the flash. But I must find something good about it, in order to sell it to someone. I would not, want to dump it on someone who does not know didiley about lenses.

I bought it without really knowing much on these new digital lenses. I was going on 35mm film amature experience, if it turns out aquiring bad photos, maybe I should have the lens looked at, to make sure, it is as good as it can be. I am sure it will work for someone, but I wish I would have just saved the money, and applied it on another lens, that now, I know I need, to get the job done, taking great photos of objects, in the distance.

I have been seeing alot of the Canon 300 F4 L's forsale lately, I am glad you got one. I appreciate the pictures that you posted on the earlier post. I will be looking forward to some pictures posted with your new 300 F4 IS L

I've taken some wonderful shots at the zoo with mine, which don't have IS.
Used at 200 and below on good light the results come great for the price I paid.
Not very usable at 300 since you need to close it down at f8 and you need a very fast shutter speed. "Because of lack of IS on mine".

ive been useing this lens since i bought my camera (friend sold it too me cause he has his 100-400L). its not a terrific lens, certainly has its limitations as was mentioned, but it really isnt a bad lens and ive gotten some great shots with it. I will be moving up to L glass as soon as i can manage the funds (most likely for the 300 F4). But if you work with the lens and realise where it can and cannot go its not a bad lens. i was recently in costa rica and was more than glad to just have a telephoto at all. i think sometimes we see our gear and see that theres better, and forget how much better gear we have than some people. *sniffle* anyway, im still getting a better lens

I had this lens and took some very nice photos with it. You just need to use it within its limitations.

Here's a link to a few shots from my first outing with the 300 F4 L IS. The weather was dull and it was late afternoon, so hardly the best shooting conditions. Still got some good results though. I shot wide open at F4 the whole time and it seems very sharp, even hand-held at shutter speeds as low as 1/90. The very shallow DOF at F4 will take some getting used to, but overall I'm very impressed. I can't wait to get out in better conditions.

The settings for the leopard shots are F4, 1/750, ISO 400
and the ducks are F4, 1/350 & 1/250, ISO 400

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=122788

Really nice shots, I think I could live with one of these Canon 300 mm F4 L IS lens, thanks for the input, looking forward to more photos posted.

I have the IS version of this same lens, I frankly think folks give this lens a bad rap. I have many-many worse push-pull manual tele-zooms for my FD mount manual camera.

I have even been able to use this lens (w/ IS off) for sports use. You need to prefocus because the AF is slow and hunts but, hey I couldn't manual focus as fast as this lens. The aperture is a bit slow but normal for a zoom of this range.

For someone that only needs a telezoom on occasion this is a fine lens. I own the 70-200mm f2.8L and still find that I have many uses for my 75-300mm IS, my 75-300 has a closer focusing distance indoors for portraits or macro-esk work. Plus I really find the IS a boon for hand held indoor low light shots. But that's another topic.

Plus these 75-300mm are super light, great for taking a tele on a trip that you may or may not need a tele. I will gladly pack the 75-300mm over the 70-200mm for tight packing trips.

The one caution I would make is never ever buy these lenses locally when they can be had for almost half the cost online. Infact I think IS makes this lens a little trooper I love my copy, I prefer it over the 70-200 f4L if you can believe that, the IS is still that good after all these years IMO. I would recommend scoring a used copy at a fair price if you can.

I agree with this, many people unfairly rate this lens as being poor. Probably because it's at its weakest used at 300mm. If you think of it more as a reasonably priced hand-held compact zoom, rather than a 300mm telephoto, it makes a lot more sense. I do take a lot of shots out at 300mm though, hence the addition of a 300mm F4 L IS Prime.

heh same here, i know the shots will come out better in quality at a lower MM, but i feel the best shot still looks better all the way in so i usually sacrifice and go to 300.

I had a good look through your image examples.
It's abit hard to be certain but i think you have a bad copy of this lens-anything near 300mm wide open is horribly soft!
It could be camera movement because the shutter speeds are very low (even image stabilization can't make up for such low speeds). Did you use a tripod?

I have this lens too, and I like it fine. It's not a great lens, but for the price and within its limitations, it's perfectly adequate. It's currently my longest lens until I get the 100-400 L zoom.