Richard2673 Loc: Eastern Oregon

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??

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

I just sold mine last week. I was never overly impressed with it to be honest. The 70-200mm f2.8 with a 1.4x TC is a much better choice, both faster and sharper.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I don't think the 70-300L is a dog. But, MT's testimonial really does speak to the top-of-the-line capability of the 70-200 f/2.8L. And that excellent sharpness is reflected in the much higher price. My 135L and 200L primes also are sharper and faster than the 70-300L. I was surprised to see the addition of more glass with the TC and the results are still better. Again, also a reflection of how much better the 70-200 is in comparison. The 70-300 is my longest focal length lens when zoomed. Overall and at the maximum zoom, the L performs noticably better than the non L I replaced.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

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

MikeMck Loc: Southern Maryland on the Bay

I have one I am trying to sell. It is a fantastic lens and tack sharp.

Island Girl

I know this is an old post but I am thinking of buy the 70 to 300 L an was wondering why you were trying to sell it? Thanks

Haydon

It's a great travel zoom. Extremely compact, sharp at the long end and built like a tank. It beats the hell out of trying to lug a 70-200 2.8L with an extender.

Island Girl

Thanks. I was thinking about buying it used. I just switched from Nikon to Canon. I have a 5d III but need to build my lens inventory. I was thinking about the 70 to 200 f4 IS. But would like the extra 100mm. Thanks so much.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Welcome Island Girl - if you click Mike's name above his profile (or anyone's), you'll see their profile page and the topics and comments they've posted. You'll see from another recent post Mike is downsizing and providing some excellent opportunities for people to purchase his equipment.

Island Girl

Thank you as you can see I'm a newbie to this forum. :D

MikeMck Loc: Southern Maryland on the Bay

I'm selling it because I just don't use it anymore and I have sold me 5D Mark III, so I don't need the full frame L series anymore. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the lens. Good luck.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Girl, welcome to the Hog.
I've not used the 70-300, but I'm sure it's an excellent lens, in spite of what the non-Canon users might say. You don't see that many of them, but it's due to the fact that most move up to the longer 100-400, also an excellent lens, and better suited to nature shooting.
That said, though it's a bit smaller than the 100-400, it's still a heavy duty L lens. Personally, when I travel, I never take my 100-400, nor would I take the 70-300, because of their size, unless I'm traveling by car. My longer travel lens is the 70-200 f4 non IS, because of its very small size, plus the 1.4x. Now if I was going strictly for nature, it would be different. I feel it's a little big as an everyday shooter though, but you may like it for that.
The one thing I would NOT worry about, is the 70-300's quality and IQ, as has been suggested by some. Good luck. ;-)
Girl, again wecome to the Hog.
SS

Island Girl

Thank you SS. The only lenses I have for my 5d Mark III is the kit lens, which is excellent, and a 100mm IS macro. I need to expand. I was thinking of the 70 to 200mm 2.8 but I've read that the f4 was sharp as well. I can't seem to justify the big jump in price for a couple of stops. So for me it is between the 70 to 200 f4 or the 70 to 300L for a zoom walk around lens. I was also thinking of the Tamron 150 to 600 for wildlife photography but have read about the focusing problem. Thanks again. I'm liking this forum!! :D Island Girl.

dls1 Loc: Massachusetts

Thank you Sharp Shooter for that reference (digital picture)!!!

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Your welcome!! ;-)
SS