70-300 IS USM v's 100-400L

Hi everyone,

I currently use a 400D and have the 75-300 kit lens. I came within a whisker of buying a 100-400L off a member here, it fell through when I looked at my account and realised there wasn't enough money in there. Sorry to the member in question for wasting your time.

I am now thinking that perhaps upgrading my 70-300 to the 70-300 IS USM.

Currently I'm struggling to get sharp photos in low(ish) light due to not being able to keep the shutter speed high enough so I'm hoping the IS will help with this.

Is the 70-300 IS USM a good upgrade for my current lens, is it a good compromise for the 100-400L until I can afford that?

I'm just an amature and don't make any money from my photography, I enjoy shooting wildlife and nature stuff as well as travelling photos.

Thanks
Peter.

What's the 70-300 kit lens? You sure it's not the 75-300? I'm going to assume it's the 75-300 you have... which is an atrocious lens comparatively.

70-300 IS isn't a bad lens, really. I used my friend's lens, and can say it's a real nice budget lens. Your aperture will be the same as the 100-400, but the real difference comes from the 100mm reach differential. If you're happy with the FL on the 75-300, I think you'll be pleasantly suprised with the improved IQ of the 70-300 IS in addition to the IS itself. They even say the 70-300 comes very close (if not matches) L quality optics.

For roughly $450, the 70-300 IS is worth it. The only downside I see is the rotating front element (makes using a Circ Polarizer a pain), but other than that the build, IS, and IQ are pretty nice.

Umm, yes sorry I meant the 75-300 Kit lens. I've updated my original post...

I have the 70-300 and the new 55-250, and like both. As a budget solution, the 55-250 has a lot going for it. It's considerably less expensive than the 70-300, is very light and convenient to use, has excellent IS and good IQ. It might be worth considering as a replacement for your 75-300.

If your subjects are static the IS will help. The 70-300mm IS is a very good consumer lens, i.e. has good IQ but build not of the standard you'd get with an EX or L standard lens. For most that is Ok and it depends where and how you shoot and how you look after your gear or not. I have owned the 70-300mm IS and also 2x copies of the 100-400mm IS L. I prefered the 70-300mm to be honest but that was just my experience. It's IQ surprised me for the money. But if you need longer than 300mm then you will have to spend out. The Sigma 150-500mm OS is finally starting to look a decent lens and that should do a great job for wildlife that needs reach, rather than zoo shooting for example, where 300mm is mainly great. I just picked one up after waiting for lots of sample images to appear as it's a new lens. If you do pick up a 100-400mm then check performance at 400mm and wide open through the range. All are not created equal IMO.

The 100-400L is a nice lens, but it doesnt have the latest IS, the 70-300IS is capable of very sharp results, I cant tell much difference between 70mm on that lens & 70mm on my L, its also very good wideopen at 300mm, or at least my copy is.

On a budget id choose the Canon 55-250IS, it offers great value for money & like the new 18-55IS its capable of stunning MTF figures, so that results in great sharpness in your final images.

The biggest downside to the 55-250 is that its EF-S, where as the 70-300IS is EF, to be honest I think if the 70-300IS was white & had a red ring, people would be raving more about it, its capable of L results, personally I like the black, you dont stand out so much

I have both, and I agree, check the 1-4 at 400 before buying.

I have both and think they are both excellent. My copy of the 100-400 is extremely sharp wide open and so is my 70-300. The 70-300 is a terrific vacation/walk around lens. There are times when I don't want to carry the 100-400 because it's too conspicuous or too heavy and that's where the 70-300 comes in. The 100-400 probably gets used much more though. I think the 70-300 would be a good interim lens.

Bob R

Edited - Thanks, Nick.

^ 100-300 lens? hehe its ok we know what you mean

The 70-300 IS is sharp, a great lens at a great price.