Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
75-300 III USM Or 70-300 Is USM  
User currently offlineHarryImp From UK - England, joined Jun 2011, 55 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 8 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4546 times:

Hi all

I have been set on the 75-300 iii usm for a while but today, the 70-300 is usm lens came to my attention. It is however a lot more money, and I will have to wait a bit longer in order to buy this, and was wondering is the extra price worth it.

Also is the price increase due to just the IS, or other factors?

If anyone has any views on either lens, let me know!

Harry

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2888 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (2 years 8 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4541 times:

Quoting HarryImp (Thread starter):
Also is the price increase due to just the IS, or other factors?

Optically, the IS version is a newer and slightly better lens. However, it's not worth spending a lot more money just for IS in my opinion. It has its uses, but unless you're shooting slower shutter speeds, you'll not see much of a benefit. IS only works with sutter speeds under ~1/250th so if you are shooting on a nice day, you'll probably be using more than this and therefore won't get any use from it. It depends what you're intending you use it for really. Bear in mind, both these lenses start to get soft over 200mm. They're still usable, but they do get softer the closer to 300mm you get. You get what you pay for when it comes to lenses unfortunately.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineAndrew50 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 121 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (2 years 8 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4516 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Are you talking about the 70-300L IS lens?

User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2888 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (2 years 8 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4510 times:

Quoting Andrew50 (Reply 2):
Are you talking about the 70-300L IS lens?

No, he's referrring to the non-L version. The L version is obviously in a different league (and price bracket).

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently onlineBorut From Slovenia, joined May 2005, 22 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 8 months 6 days ago) and read 4505 times:

There is also Canon 55-250 IS which is probably even cheaper than 75-300 and images taken @250 mm can be accepted here.

Cheers, Borut


User currently onlineeggohoek From Hungary, joined Nov 2005, 55 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (2 years 8 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4496 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Choose the more expensice 70-300 IS, but not buy it!

Buy the same price Canon 70-200 f4 L.


User currently onlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9794 posts, RR: 26
Reply 6, posted (2 years 8 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 4492 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 3):
No, he's referrring to the non-L version. The L version is obviously in a different league (and price bracket).

I haven't used the new 75-300, but far as I've read, it's quality (and price) is more in line with the 55-250.

The 70-300 IS USM is a fair bit better than the 55-250, having used both lenses as my main telephoto (on Amazon, the 75-300 is listed at $140 new, while hte 70-300 is $520).

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 1):
Bear in mind, both these lenses start to get soft over 200mm.

My 70-300 is usable out to around 260mm.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineRonS From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 762 posts, RR: 22
Reply 7, posted (2 years 8 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 4466 times:

Quoting eggohoek (Reply 5):
Buy the same price Canon 70-200 f4 L.

I agree, then save for a 1.4x.



All opinions expressed by me are my own opinions & do not represent the opinions in any way of my employers.
User currently offlineGaryck From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 298 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 8 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4444 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting RonS (Reply 7):
Quoting eggohoek (Reply 5):Buy the same price Canon 70-200 f4 L.
I agree, then save for a 1.4x.

I had the 75-300, I got fed up of 'soft' rejections on here so when and bought the 70-200 f4 L. I have never looked back. You'll see far better images from that lens that the 75-300. I know its only 200mm but when editing I find you can crop images quiet alot more too.



Keep your Ladders close, but your camera closer
User currently onlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 9, posted (2 years 8 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4444 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Harry - add me to the list who would argue for the 70-200mm f/4 'L'.

In days of old I used the 70-300mm IS lens (admittedly, I think it was the older model and I have never had a go with the newer version), and it was fine generally, But what really struck me when I upgraded to the 'L' lens was that a photo taken at 200mm with that 'L' lens, and then cropped in to mimic the focal length of the 300mm, still had a lot more detail and clarity, despite the cropping, than that produced by the non-'L' 70-300mm at 300mm. So I could 'mimic' the extra reach of the 70-300mm by cropping the originals and still get significantly better quality images.

It was those tests I did at the time which demonstrated to me that fundamentally the opticals are superior in the 'L'. The non-IS f/4 70-200mm is amazingly portable and a lovely lens for all kinds of photography (and consistent across all focal lengths). The bargain 'L' lens.

As I say, it may be that the newer version of the 70-300mm had superior optics - but in your shoes I would want to see evidence of that.

Zoom reach is great but overally quality trumps it every time for me.

Cheers.

Paul


User currently offlineSIA6696 From Australia, joined Dec 2009, 90 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 8 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4356 times:

Out of the two lenses you have shortlisted, go with the 70-300mm IS USM. It focuses faster, has IS and is built much better then the 75-300mm. But for a vast improvement that is still relatively cheap go with the 70-200mm f4 L USM. And if you can afford it get the IS version as the optics is slightly better.


The best seat in a plane is the one you are in.
User currently offlineHarryImp From UK - England, joined Jun 2011, 55 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 8 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4290 times:

Yes but that 70-200 is out of the question due to range + cost. So is there any more info?!

Harry


User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2888 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (2 years 8 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4282 times:

Quoting HarryImp (Reply 11):
Yes but that 70-200 is out of the question due to range + cost. So is there any more info?!

You'll get the argument that the 70-200 F/4 L will give better quality when cropped than the 70-300 IS USM will at 300mm so it depends how often you'll be using the longer end of the range. If cost is a barrier, then either save-up for the 70-200 or go for the 70-300 IS USM.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently onlineeggohoek From Hungary, joined Nov 2005, 55 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (2 years 8 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4258 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting HarryImp (Reply 11):
Yes but that 70-200 is out of the question due to range + cost. So is there any more info?!

Choose the cheaper 75-300 III USM.
70-300 IS is the most expensive version. 70-300 IS is not a only one lens in all of the life. When you would like a really good lens you have to sell the 70-300 IS -----> loosing money.... more money if you have to sell a cheaper lens.

Buy a second hand 75-300III USM (in my country it's about 100 GBP or less).


User currently offlineLGW340 From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 8 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4251 times:

Quoting SIA6696 (Reply 10):
Yes but that 70-200 is out of the question due to range + cost

You can pick up a near Mint condition second hand Canon EF 70-200mm F/4 L USM (Non IS) for about £399. AWESOME lens

C J Goodwin



Live life from the window seat...
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Comments On The Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 III Usm? posted Thu Jul 25 2002 17:19:00 by OH-LZA
Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 III Vs. Sigma 70-300mm F posted Wed Mar 16 2005 05:16:57 by SkyWestFan
Canon EF 75-300 III, III USM Or IS? posted Thu Jul 12 2001 07:47:38 by AA_Cam
Canon 75-300, USM Or No? posted Mon Apr 24 2006 03:10:16 by Cadet57
EF 75-300 Vs EF 75-300 USM posted Tue Aug 1 2006 06:08:47 by NicolasRubio
Canon 75-300 4-5.6 USM Is Lens Question posted Mon Jul 11 2005 19:44:20 by Madjones
Opinions On Canon 75-300 Is USM posted Tue May 11 2004 15:23:18 by Danny
Canon 75-300 USM Is Problem, Any Ideas? posted Sun Mar 21 2004 14:04:28 by Jkw777
Anyone Using The Canon 75-300 Is USM Lens? posted Sun Feb 22 2004 12:02:30 by Soren-a
Canon EOS 30 + EF 75-300 Is USM posted Tue Feb 5 2002 08:19:42 by Ndizani