How is the Canon 70-300mm Lens?

jtope232 wrote in post #5601455
Hello all,

I shoot minor league baseball and was wondering what everyone thought about how the 70-300mm would perform in baseball like conditions?

Thank you very much,
Justin

Justin,
For 5xx.00 $ it is a great value.
http://www.amazon.com …ens-Cameras/dp/B0007Y794O
Some have advised getting the 70-200 2.8.
http://www.amazon.com …ens-Cameras/dp/B0007Y794O
If you can afford it, it also is a great lens. If you want IS with the 70-200 f 2.8
http://www.amazon.com …ens-Cameras/dp/B0007Y794O
Bring to the table $18xx.00
For the money spent I feel the 70-300 IS or the 70-200 F4 L (aprox same price) are great.
BUT!!! Bang for the buck? 70-300 IS for the average shooter. It is not perfect, but it get's really close for the money.
Just my .02,
Ron

Just got done shooting about 900 shots over the weekend over 5 games in little league. I used a friend's 70-300 (lent my out) and both lenses are sharp. Sharpness, reach (up to about 280mm), and IS are its strong points. Weaknesses - AF not a fast as I would like it, and extending lense when focusing (watch out when shooting thru a chain linked fence). All in all a pretty good lens - maybe not as good as the 100-400L, then again you're only paying a 1/3 of the cost.

chantu wrote in post #5607147
Just got done shooting about 900 shots over the weekend over 5 games in little league. I used a friend's 70-300 (lent my out) and both lenses are sharp. Sharpness, reach (up to about 280mm), and IS are its strong points. Weaknesses - AF not a fast as I would like it, and extending lense when focusing (watch out when shooting thru a chain linked fence). All in all a pretty good lens - maybe not as good as the 100-400L, then again you're only paying a 1/3 of the cost.

This is what I am talking about. Wise words here. If you have a budget to stay within, the 70-300 IS is great value. I have the 70-300 IS and the 100-400 L, but I bought the 100-400 L for a very limited reason. Hummingbirds!
Don't get me wrong. The 100-400L is a MUCH better lens than the 70-300. But, for the bucks, the 70-300 is a MUCH better value.
Try renting each lens and see which one gives you the results you are looking for. There are a number of great rental places out there. www.lensrentals.com is who I have used a number of times.
Rent the 70-300 IS and the 70-200 F4 L non is and see which one works for your uses the best.
70-200 F4
http://www.lensrentals​.com …300mm-f4-5.6-is/for-canon
70-300 IS
http://www.lensrentals​.com …300mm-f4-5.6-is/for-canon
Renting has saved me money as I found out this is not what I wanted but that was.
EX, I wanted a 300 F4L I thought. Rented it and then rented the 100-400L.
Found the 100-400 fit my needs better.
Money for rental was well spent IMHO.
Not everyone wants/needs an L lens to get what they want in a pic.
Hope this helps in some small way.
Just my .02,
Ron

AdamJL wrote in post #5603067
IMO, it's one of Canon's most under-rated lenses.

+1 on that