I had the 70-300 DO, which is a wonderful small telezoom lens. I bought it because I wanted a portable but good quality telezoom, and at the time most people were complaining about lack of sharpness in the 75-300 lenses that were available (the 70-300 non-DO, which seems to be quite good according to the reviews, didn't yet exist).
I was however never really satisfied with the 70-300 DO. At f/5.6 it's not a very fast lens, and especially at 300mm, f/5.6, the image quality was disappointing (not sharp and lack of contrast).
So I just sold my 70-300 DO today and bought the EF 200 f/2.8 L II USM. I also got a Canon 1.4x extender with it (which makes it a 280mm f/4).
 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script |
I haven't had time to really try it out yet, but I did a quick comparison with the 70-300 DO. The 200 L is so much sharper and the contrast is so much better... even at f/2.8 it is perfectly sharp, and also with the teleconverter it is still a lot sharper than the 70-300 DO. Ok, the comparison is probably not really fair... (a non-L zoom against an L prime...).
