(New Topic) Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM Lens
Jul 16, 2019 19:50:04 #
bleirer wrote:
I think the newer 70-300 is a lot sharper though, at least comparing the test images. Actual practice it could be fine. I have the 75-300 and it is noticeably worse on the test images, but I limp along with it while I research alternatives and dream of a brighter future.
If you have the old 75-300 it was a really low end consumer lens.
Jul 16, 2019 19:59:25 #
imagemeister wrote:
The Tamron 100-400 is very sharp - Imatest results show it to be best in class - but the question is the speed accuracy and consistency of it's AF !
If speed, accuracy and consistency of AF matters, then you want a CANON lens.
.
If speed, accuracy and consistency of AF matters, then you want a CANON lens.
.
Really, you think that the Tammy is as good as the Canon mk II?
Jul 16, 2019 20:08:22 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
Bleirer I have owned the Canon 300mm f/4L, the 400... (show quote)
You misunderstand my reply, I said the 300 is sharper than the 70-300, not the 400. I'm still drooling over the 100-400 but I can buy the 400 I'm renting for $850 so maybe....
Jul 16, 2019 20:23:10 #
bleirer wrote:
You misunderstand my reply, I said the 300 is sharper than the 70-300, not the 400. I'm still drooling over the 100-400 but I can buy the 400 I'm renting for $850 so maybe....
Like I said if you shop you can find them cheaper, I was going to give on to my son for Christmas and I picked it up for about $600 and I ended up not giving it to him and sold it for about the same price, it was the 400 f/5.6L. I don't know, I just looked on Ebay and maybe I sold my for a little less than I could have gotten for it, I think you are right, $750 to $800. I sold my 300mm for somewhere around $600 as well, but I am certain I paid less than $500 for it here on this site, I wasn't even looking for that lens but it was so cheap I couldn't resist buying it. But I honestly was not happy with the 300mm, it was the first long prime I had owned so I had fond memories of it but when I compared to to my newer lenses it was a bit lacking in IQ, I am talking of course about a 300/4 because the 300/2.8 is a different animal altogether, I sold a 500mm f/4 to get the 300mm f/2.8 II and never looked back.
Jul 16, 2019 21:22:12 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
Really, you think that the Tammy is as good as the Canon mk II?
Looking at published Imatesting numbers - yes .....https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-597795-1.html
There are other considerations like f6.3, and AF accuracy, speed and consistency - and , of course build quality - with respect to the Tammy.
In my own personal testing, including with 1.4X extenders, the 100-400 II @400 wide open and the 400 prime wide open are equal. Paid $600 for my 400 prime off ebay - but I did have to wait awhile.
.
Jul 17, 2019 10:38:22 #
This is a very good lens, reasonable size and weight, excellent sharpness and clarity of pictures. The focus is very quick. It seems to focus as fast as my Canon 4L IS.
Jul 17, 2019 15:18:42 #
Interesting factoid about the 400 I just got for rental. It auto focus with a 2x extender on, did it Just to try it . Didn't expect that. Canon RP. Have to crank the iso way up though to shoot handheld so not practical. 1.4 more like it.
Sep 1, 2019 01:36:23 #
ringo454 wrote:
I recently purchased a Canon D6 Mark II camera and would like to get a telephoto lens without breaking the bank. On my previous camera I did use a Tamron 70-300mm lens. However I would like to stay with Canon lens with this new camera.
If anybody would be kind enough to lend me your thoughts and experience with this Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM Lens. Any info, pro or con, would be appreciated! Thank you! BGS
If anybody would be kind enough to lend me your thoughts and experience with this Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM Lens. Any info, pro or con, would be appreciated! Thank you! BGS
In case you are still considering purchasing this lens, here are my thoughts. I've had this lens on my 80D for about 2 1/2 years and am very happy with it. I have taken several thousand photos with it, most at the sports car races. This lens is one of the reasons I made the move from a bridge camera to a DSLR. I realized I could get high quality images without carrying a large and heavy lens. I do a lot of walking with my camera and the light weight was a key reason for getting the 80D and the reach of the 70-300. The lens is sharp and I think you will be happy with it.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.