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

[tesign2]

As the presenter Lok Tse suggested, none of this controversy would have arisen had this lens not been marketed as an 'L', but rather as 70-300 f4-5.6 IS II.

It gotta be a joke to call the new 70-300mm f/4-5.6L USM IS a 70-300 f4-5.6 IS II. What "controversy" are they talking about anyway...sighhh. all I know from day 1 following up on this lens are ppl complaining that its too expensive for f/5.6 and too heavy..whatever. Regardless..I find it "satisfaction" wise compared to my 70-200 f/4 and f/2.8 in performance and $s spend. The luv of it most is packing it...no :sweat:

 

[aero93t]

Every time after watching their 'videos' either on a product launch or so call "evaluation" ..really I dunno what they are actually trying to tell the audiences. Its always "open verdict" and iszit it "recommended"..most of the time, nobody knows. I find them very "uncommitted" in product recommendation wise.

Not sure how they come to such a conclusion of the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L USM IS..but I do fun them very entertaining especially when I'm bored. :bsmilie:

Well DigitalRevCom is an online camera store and as such, i don't think it is to their advantage to slam any one of the products that they are selling. Therefore the verdicts are either 'highly recommended' or 'open'.