Richard2673 wrote:
Everyone thank you for the info you have given me in the past....
Has any one had any experience with the Canon L 70 - 300 f4 - 5.6 lense. Sharpness., etc??
Richard, it's hard to decipher everything that you read here, especially with no explanations, other than personal hunches.
I have tested all of my Canon lenses against themselves, and my results are always, that NO Canon L lens using an extender, is sharper, than any other L lens in it's native focal length.
CHG is correct, the 70-300 is no dog. It has almost the same exact zoom ratio as the 100-400, and the 100-400 is extremely sharp, I have the 70 -200 f4, which is the sharpest 70-200 with the exception of the new mkll, and with a 1.4x my 100-400 at 280mm is sharper than my 70-200 with the 1.4x at 280mm.
And my results are consistent with the results of professional testers. I will refer you to, "the digital picture". He is the most respected tester on the net. When you click on the 70-300, then click on the bullet at the top " image quality". After you figure out how to use the comparison tools, you can view the differences between the 70-200 with 1.4x and the 70-300 alternately. When you look at the mm of length, there are two 280mm numbers. The first is with 1.4mkll, the second set is with 1.4mklll extenders. What you are looking for will be very apparent. Also, while you're at it, You might even want to read the review.
The 70-300 is an L lens. Every L lens is designed to deliver maximum professional results, in any situation. And a pro will not hesitate to buy any L lens that fits the job, and can with confidence, do a shoot for Nat Geo. If that lens fits your needs and price range, I would not hesitate to buy one!
Richard, it's too bad that there are those here that are quick to offer a personal opinion, but have virtually no knowledge of Canon equipment whatsoever.
Good luck. ;-)
SS