Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM

Camera Nerd wrote in post #10796410
uhmm i guess if people keep on saying that a 70-200 2.8 and 1.4 tc for the same price is more versatile than the 70-300 well i guess that should be an indicator to canon that this has to be the stupidest repackaged lens ever.

I don't agree with your assessment... at all. The ONLY combo in the same price class as the new 70-300 L is the 70-200mm f/2.8 NON-IS with 1.4x tc. New, the 2.8 IS mk I goes for $1600+... and the 1.4x TC is $300.

You're comparing an $2000 investment to a brand new edition lens that will likely have a street price of $1300-$1400 within the first year. The 70-200mm IS mk I is slightly outdated, and I'd much rather be carrying around the new 70-300L... which is also smaller.

I think they priced this well. The 70-300 IS USM non-DO had so much promise--but it was nowhere near the overall quality of an L lens. This rectifies the issue. Over time, the new 70-300L will end up being 2x the price of what the 70-300 non-DO settled at... not overpriced at all for better optics, improved IS, FTM focusing, ring-usm, etc, etc...

jacobsen1 wrote in post #10796557
+1

exactly.


I wonder how many of those people actually HAVE 70-200s and use them with TCs regularly... Yes TCs work, and they work well on the super teles and even the new 70-200 2.8 IS II. But there IS a AF hit and there IS a IQ hit. The 70-300 will be sharper (according to the charts) than the 70-200 with a TC. It will be smaller and it will be less expensive and it will AF faster.

So the real question is, which end of the range will you use MORE. This lens is faster at 70 and up to somewhere before 200... This new lens is better at 201~300. So from let's say 100~200 a 70-200 wins? If that's your range, that's your lens. If you NEED a TC all the time, the 70-300 is the lens for you. Case closed. People always say the same thing about the 100-400 and using other lenses with TCs instead, but guess what, the 100-400 is an amazing lens and NOT needing TCs is awful nice.

YMMV
we'll see ~50 more posts about TCs before noon tomorrow and I'd bet 45 of them are from people w/o the 70-200 or a TC.
$.02

This is very true. I use TCs with my 70-200mms almost all the time--permanently stuck on. Us TC users (especially the ones with 1.4x TCs on 70-200mm f/4 IS) would be KEENLY interested in the new 70-300mm.

By the way... no one said us 100-400mm users can't stick a 1.4x TC on after taping pins It'll endlessly hunt in low-light, but on a nice bright day no problems.

jacobsen1 wrote in post #10792328
lenscoat makes neoprene covers for most of canon's Ls that come in black. I agree it'd be nice if the lens was black on it's own, but it's a solution for some people...

For this lens however, there's not much area to cover let alone for the neoprene to stay in place. It would look like burnt onion rings or calamari in black ink hanging on for dear life.

I wonder if the lens stays at its compact length or like the DO version, doubles in length? Probably the latter given how both existing 70-300mm behave.

It looks like there might be a switch for the zoom lock from the pictures. Does that mean there is a possible zoom creep on an L lens?

Sufficiently intrigued since I find 200mm a tad short on FF cameras on occasion. However, I wish it was kept black, since a white lens, even with the relatively compact 70-200 f/4L IS, I get unwanted attention sometimes.

Let's see what the reviewers have to say.

above from Canon USA site.

what could that function be?

Mu Eugene wrote in post #10797004
above from Canon USA site.

what could that function be?

Some lenses turn of the IS when it senses it's on a tripod. I think that's what they're talking about.

I was thinking Canon was crazy for releasing this lens at first, but it would actually work pretty well for my wildlife shooting. I use the 400 f/5.6 and this would give me a great lens to shoot with that. I already have the Siggy 70-200 which I could keep for sports work, but the extra 100mm would be handy for wildlife. Add me to the list of those hoping that it is at f/4 until 200mm. Then the lens would make a lot more sense IMO.

For crop shooters happy with a slower lens with great IQ (who probably have the 15-85), a lens with these specifications and equally good IQ makes sense. 18-55 and 55-250 for entry-level, 15-85 and 70-300 for the next step up (before the 17-55 and 70-200 combo).

There's no reason to make it an L lens and double the price - that just takes it out of the league of 15-85 shooters, and puts it squarely into the territory of those who are willing to pay for something longer, faster or both, and wouldn't be interested in this lens.

I was very keen on the 70-200 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC combination until I had a chance to try it. The image quality leaves nothing to be desired. The AF is fine as well, but the focal range is not very practical, swapping the TC on and off is a p.i.t.a (takes longer than switching lenses) and the whole setup is rather big and draws a lot of attention.
Just my experience with the 70-200L f/4 IS + converter combo.

Hmm, let's see.

Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm VR: Internal focusing, good build quality, weather sealing, good optics, image stabilization, ring-type ultrasonic motor...$520 at Amazon.com

Tamron 70-300mm VC USD: ring-type ultrasonic motor and image stabilization for $450.

What does the extra $1000 of the Canon 70-300L bring, besides the white paint and red ring?

996gt2 wrote in post #10797099
Hmm, let's see.

Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm VR: Internal focusing, good build quality, weather sealing, good optics, image stabilization, ring-type ultrasonic motor...$520 at Amazon.com

Tamron 70-300mm VC USD: ring-type ultrasonic motor and image stabilization for $450.

What does the extra $1000 of the Canon 70-300L bring, besides the white paint and red ring?

MTF charts will show the 70-300L to be highly superior to the 70-300 DO which is overpriced at $1300... the 7-3 L IQ will likely blow away the Nikon and Tamron variants.

As always, you pay a premium for that extra bit of perfection. A bit of speculation my part (since no samples have been tested yet), but I have no doubt that the optics will be greatly improved to the previous 70-300 non-DO.

996gt2 wrote in post #10797099
Hmm, let's see.

Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm VR: Internal focusing, good build quality, weather sealing, good optics, image stabilization, ring-type ultrasonic motor...$520 at Amazon.com

Tamron 70-300mm VC USD: ring-type ultrasonic motor and image stabilization for $450.

What does the extra $1000 of the Canon 70-300L bring, besides the white paint and red ring?

300g + Made-In-Japan

MOkoFOko wrote in post #10797116
MTF charts will show the 70-300L to be highly superior to the 70-300 DO which is overpriced at $1300... the 7-3 L IQ will likely blow away the Nikon and Tamron variants.

As always, you pay a premium for that extra bit of perfection. A bit of speculation my part (since no samples have been tested yet), but I have no doubt that the optics will be greatly improved to the previous 70-300 non-DO.

I don't know about the Tamron since it hasn't been tested yet, but the Nikon is no slouch. Its optics are arguably better than that of the old Canon 70-300 IS, which was already pretty good.

For this new 70-300 to justify its $1500 price tag, it would have to be as sharp as the 70-200 f/2.8 L II at all focal lengths...and I don't think that's likely.

996gt2 wrote in post #10797139
I don't know about the Tamron since it hasn't been tested yet, but the Nikon is no slouch. Its optics are arguably better than that of the old Canon 70-300 IS, which was already pretty good.

For this new 70-300 to justify its $1500 price tag, it would have to be as sharp as the 70-200 f/2.8 L II at all focal lengths...and I don't think that's likely.

I think the all-important length for this model is really the 150-300 range... maybe even 200-300.

The 70-300 non-DO was only PRETTY GOOD--check comparison shots on the-digital-picture--the IQ simply could not compare to the 70-200 f/4 models. Again, we haven't seen the new 70-300L in action, but I have no doubt that the optics will be largely improved when compared to the non-DO 7-3. That said, the Nikon won't be able to compete (moot point, different systems). And concerning the Tamron competition... they're usually disappointing. I've yet to see a Tamron with AF I've been impressed with, not counting primes.

gsfo wrote in post #10796311
Any more info on the 70-300L? Will it be f2.0 like the 70-200 mk2?

Hmm, are you in the wrong thread? The 70-300L does not even take tele-extenders....

Perhaps you are looking for this thread instead: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=922485

You'll be able to find out everything that is known about the 70-300L (23 pages and still growing).



P.S. The 70-200 Mk II is not F2.0.

will the Tamron work on Full Frame?

robonrome wrote in post #10797187
will the Tamron work on Full Frame?

Tamron ONLY makes EF mount for Canon. So yes, it will work on FF

MOkoFOko wrote in post #10797194
Tamron ONLY makes EF mount for Canon. So yes, it will work on FF

They make crop only lenses as well.. 17-50 is one of them