which one
Feb 17, 2019 11:31:35 #
I am going to buy myself a birthday present, for a big number birthday. I can't decide which one. The 70-300 f4-5.6 IS 11 at about $500 (from KEH) or the L model for about $1,000 (also KEH). As I am not a professional photographer I do not require pro quality gear. But I do want the best possible gear for the money. So the quesstion I have to answer,is it just ego that makes me want the white lens or will it make a real difference in the quality of the photos, if I go for the other one. REviews don't seem to be all that different. The extra $500 is not unimportant money but it won't c hange my lifestyle. So which one?
Feb 17, 2019 11:39:45 #
If you are certain the more expensive lens will have a positive psychological effect on you and somehow help to encourage you to shoot better pictures, then go with that. Otherwise, the cheaper lens will do just fine. In most situations, the performance difference between the two lenses will be marginal.
Feb 17, 2019 11:44:02 #
If you "pixel peek" enlarging your image to extreme detail thenthe "L" might be worth it but otherwise and if you just want good sharp images to view on typical TV or monitor the "L" would likely be overkill and you could use that extra $500 for another gift. In my opinion and experience, that is. I have and use the 300mm f/4 L and the 55-250 ef-s and each one has given me excellent images. I do pixel peek and can see a difference at 400% magnification but how often do I need that much crop/blow up? Nearly never.
Feb 17, 2019 13:08:00 #
boberic wrote:
I am going to buy myself a birthday present, for a... (show quote)
If you are not sure, go for the expensive one. If you get the cheaper one and you are not thrilled with the results you will regret not buying the best. If you get the best and are not thrilled with the results you will know you only have your skills to blame.
Also, your heirs will thank you for leaving an 'L' lens (which hold their value pretty well) instead of blowing the extra $500 on fast women or slow horses.
Feb 17, 2019 13:32:02 #
Feb 17, 2019 15:18:45 #
I hope you figure out which "big one" you're having!!!! :0)
Sorry, it's hard to write headlines, and fun to take them literally.
Sorry, it's hard to write headlines, and fun to take them literally.
Feb 17, 2019 17:56:23 #
boberic wrote:
I am going to buy myself a birthday present, for a... (show quote)
The biggest advantage of the L over the other is build quality. If you are not going to beat it up, the 70-300 f4-5.6 IS II is optically comparable to the L.
https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1041-canon70300f456is2
https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/570-canon70300f456islff
Feb 18, 2019 07:07:56 #
boberic wrote:
I am going to buy myself a birthday present, for a... (show quote)
I don't know what body you're using, but it doesn't appear to be massively better optically to have the L version. It may depend more on what body you'd use it with. The link below is for the 7D Mk II, but you can tinker with the bodies and settings on that page.
If you have a store near you where you can make some sample shots with each, then see how they look on your computer, do that. I have the non-L version. It's pretty sharp. I haven't tried the L version on my camera to see how much better it might be...yet.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1077&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=738&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0
Feb 18, 2019 07:22:28 #
I agree with repleo, if you are considering the L lens, then go with it. You will always think in the back of your mind you should have gotten it if you buy the less expensive lens. Although, I have the 70-300 4-5.6 lens, version I and it is a very good lens. I would assume the version II would be as good or better. One other suggestion, if you go with the less expensive lens, you can buy it on on ebay brand new for less than $450.
Feb 18, 2019 07:28:01 #
After years of buying stuff, I've discovered that paying the highest amount possible does not make a great difference in my life. I could shoot a hundred pictures with good gear and a hundred pictures with great gear, and the differences between them would be negligible. In your situation, I would spend $500 and enjoy taking great pictures.
Happy 21st!
Happy 21st!
Feb 18, 2019 08:16:38 #
mizzee
Loc: Boston,Ma
I know this is going to sound silly but you might want to consider the weight and where/how you’ll use it. Here’s why: I had a lovely Nikon 70-200 and other lenses that I took on a six week Western trip. I did a fair amount of hiking. I quickly discovered that the 70-200 was not a hiking sort of lens because of its weight and size. I used it twice on the whole trip. Consider renting the 300 for a few days, then you’ll know for sure. Happy birthday!
Feb 18, 2019 08:56:44 #
ggab
Loc: ?
boberic wrote:
I am going to buy myself a birthday present, for a... (show quote)
I have the 70-300 f4-5.6 IS 11 and have found it to be soft at 300mm.
The focus, however, is crazy fast.
If I had the money, I would go for the L.
My $0.02 worth.
Feb 18, 2019 09:23:40 #
ggab wrote:
I have the 70-300 f4-5.6 IS 11 and have found it to be soft at 300mm.
The focus, however, is crazy fast.
If I had the money, I would go for the L.
My $0.02 worth.
The focus, however, is crazy fast.
If I had the money, I would go for the L.
My $0.02 worth.
Definitely a tad soft at 300. I can back mine off to maybe 260 and it's good. I, too, would rather have the L if I had the money. The other comment about the extra weight is a good point.
Feb 18, 2019 10:17:31 #
I have 70-300 IS version 1 and have had this lens several years. For me as a 50 year amateur with SLRs then DLSRs find this lens more then adequate for anything I can find a use for it. Sure I'd like the L version, but only justification would be if this one dies which I doubt will happen as it has held up under many many road trips, long hikes, camping expeditions etc....
Feb 18, 2019 10:52:56 #
I want to make it simple so that you can understand me. I use Olympus mirrorless cameras. When it came to buy a tele-zoom I had the excellent, professional 40-140 f2.8 Zuiko and the 40-140 f4-5.6 kit lens. I knew that the f2.8 lens was better built and had better quality but I also knew it was 10 times more expensive and heavier. Which one? I settled for the cheaper lens and I have not regretted my choice. The little lens has been an exceptional performer for me.
Sometimes less is more.
Sometimes less is more.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.