The new EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
- Thread starter canon450D
- Start date
What is in the hell going on with this expensive lens ? is this one produce superior IQ ? from the max aperture value is not fast enough and only works in the daylight . There must be some thing wrong with the price , then .
If I compare to the prices at DD electronics (current prices after 2% discount with cash):
Canon EF 70-200mm F4L USM Autofocus Lens = S$907
Canon EF 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS USM Autofocus Lens = S$692
Canon 70-300mm F4-5.6L IS USM will probably cost around S$1,700 (if AP selling at $1950) and at double the price as compared to the above 2 lenses, it really has to be very very good to justify spending double! :angry:
Canon EF 70-200mm F4L USM Autofocus Lens = S$907
Canon EF 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS USM Autofocus Lens = S$692
Canon 70-300mm F4-5.6L IS USM will probably cost around S$1,700 (if AP selling at $1950) and at double the price as compared to the above 2 lenses, it really has to be very very good to justify spending double! :angry:
Last edited:
Come on people..... wake up. Its white and comes with a red band in front. What were you expecting?
True..there must be a reason for it. May be a little more read up (link below) may convince some and still may be not.
http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=3512
Sniped from review somewhere :
Model MFD MM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens 47.2" (1200mm) .21x
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS USM Lens 47.2" (1200mm) .21x
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM Lens 59.1" (1500mm) .13x
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM Lens 47.2" (1200mm) .21x
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS L USM Lens 47.2" (1200mm) .21x
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens 59.1" (1500mm) .25x
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM Lens 55.1" (1400mm) .25x
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM Lens 70.9" (1800mm) .20x
Canon EF 300mm f/4.0 L IS USM Lens 59.1" (1500mm) .24x
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model f/4.0 f/4.5 f/5.0 f/5.6
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS L USM 70-103mm 104-154mm 155-228mm 229-300mm
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM 70-84mm 85-134mm 135-224mm 225-300mm
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM 70-94mm 95-184mm 185-300mm
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens 75-94mm 95-139mm 140-239mm 240-300mm
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM 100-129mm 130-259mm 260-400mm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just got this lens not too long ago, and took a moon shot :bsmilie:
http://picasaweb.google.com/waichong.low/CanonEF70300mmL#
Edit: Not sure why, but PicasaWeb doesn't seem to want to work here, so I'm putting the direct link instead.
http://picasaweb.google.com/waichong.low/CanonEF70300mmL#
Edit: Not sure why, but PicasaWeb doesn't seem to want to work here, so I'm putting the direct link instead.
Last edited:
Well, this is my first L lens, so I'm not used to this kind of build and quality. But off hand I can say the IS on this lens works better than the 70-200 F4L, cos I was trying both lenses in the shop and this lens produced blur free images. Or it could be that this lens is sharper than the 70-200 F4L? :bsmilie:
For almost the same price, I'd take this lens over the 70-200 F4L seeing how the IS fares much better, so the drop in F-stop doesn't faze me that much.
I can't seem to post pics from PicasaWeb here, but if you look at the link in my signature (or the one in my post above), the moon looks pretty sharp at 300mm. I can see the craters along the edge of the moon in the enlarged crop, and I took all those test pics handheld (didn't buy the tripod collar). Granted, the moon shot was taken at faster than 1/(focal length)
However, the lens is quite heavy - 1 kg, and my arms were starting to tire after holding the camera for a while (yes, I need more exercise). I originally bought this lens for traveling due to the range and compact (compared to 70-200 F2.8L and shorter than 70-200 F4L) size. It was a toss up between this one, the 70-200F4L or the new Tamron SP 70-300mm, but the Tamron hasn't arrived in Singapore yet, and I wanted a (good) telephoto for my Sentosa trip next week.
I saw some complaints about bokeh on the web, but it seems quite all right to me. I'm a satisfied owner - great sharpness, great IS, great range. Granted, my only experience with other lenses has been the 17-55 F2.8 and 18-200mm (both Canon), so this lens would be much better and thus I have some bias in my judgment. :bsmilie:
Edit: I've put up some stuff on a blog, but actually its not a detailed as what I described here: http://universalstudiossingaporereview.blogspot.com/
For almost the same price, I'd take this lens over the 70-200 F4L seeing how the IS fares much better, so the drop in F-stop doesn't faze me that much.
I can't seem to post pics from PicasaWeb here, but if you look at the link in my signature (or the one in my post above), the moon looks pretty sharp at 300mm. I can see the craters along the edge of the moon in the enlarged crop, and I took all those test pics handheld (didn't buy the tripod collar). Granted, the moon shot was taken at faster than 1/(focal length)
However, the lens is quite heavy - 1 kg, and my arms were starting to tire after holding the camera for a while (yes, I need more exercise). I originally bought this lens for traveling due to the range and compact (compared to 70-200 F2.8L and shorter than 70-200 F4L) size. It was a toss up between this one, the 70-200F4L or the new Tamron SP 70-300mm, but the Tamron hasn't arrived in Singapore yet, and I wanted a (good) telephoto for my Sentosa trip next week.
I saw some complaints about bokeh on the web, but it seems quite all right to me. I'm a satisfied owner - great sharpness, great IS, great range. Granted, my only experience with other lenses has been the 17-55 F2.8 and 18-200mm (both Canon), so this lens would be much better and thus I have some bias in my judgment. :bsmilie:
Edit: I've put up some stuff on a blog, but actually its not a detailed as what I described here: http://universalstudiossingaporereview.blogspot.com/
Last edited:
Some cat shots up on the blog and albums from a 30 min walk around my neighbourhood. On my PC, the nose area of IMG_6854 looks sharp at 100%. Was trying to aim for the eyes but guess my arm was waving around too much @ 300mm. Guess I should try for higher F-stops - the DOF seems a bit too thin? The flower pic though seems soft. I'm not sure why. Both were taken at around 1m - 2m away from the subject.
Brought this new lens for travel photography purpose , weight 1.05kg itself . Wow , you must have a strong hand ;-)
Apart from TK, where can I get my hands on this? Looking to get one b4 this weekend b4 I goes to Korea for holiday..