Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Quoting SIA6696 (Reply 3): the L version, both are quite expensive and not really worth it |
Quoting JakTrax (Reply 4): Jeez, some of the advice I've seen this past week on here really is misleading! The 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L is one of the best lenses Canon have ever produced. Perhaps not worth it to you but I'd sooner have it than the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS. |
Quoting SIA6696 (Reply 6): I'm not saying that it isn;t a bad lens, I'm just saying that you could get the much better 70-200mm f/4 IS USM, that is cheaper and much sharper, instead to the 70-300mm L. You could also get the much better 100-400mm that is only a bit more. |
Quoting SIA6696 (Reply 6): I'm just saying that you could get the much better 70-200mm f/4 IS USM, that is cheaper and much sharper |
Quoting chris493 (Reply 9): So my understanding is that a 70-300mm telephoto lens is what most guys use for their snaps, which I suppose makes sense considering the size of Heathrow for distance shots |