Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Compare the two in different situations and I think you will see a difference, especially in lower light situations....

jazzman1 Loc: South Of The Border

BTW...from the chart here I can see the 300L shows higher scores than the other two lens, but just barely. Those figures are not a blowout, unless that's a common....being a small difference among better lens.

jazzman1 Loc: South Of The Border

Now that I have noticed. Soon as the sun starts to fade my lens starts to fail horribly. That I've encountered. Not a good lens in low light.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

A small difference if those numbers can be a huge difference in real life....

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

The IS buys you a stop or two...

jazzman1 Loc: South Of The Border

Thanks peterff and all you guys. What you've said is helping me understand lens tech. I guess small better numbers can be hugh as you say in real life shooting situations. Everyone has been great, thanks for all the reply's. I'll end this thread here.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

This might hel.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/lenses
http://lenshero.com/lens-comparison
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx
http://www.lenstip.com/lenses.html
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare

COLANN Loc: Pahiatua Tararua New Zealand

Go for it, i have had mine for around 7 mths and it is almost a fixture on my Canon 600d, think thats a 3ti in the US, i find it quite good, mind you i am not saying there are not better lenses out there, all depends on how deep your pockets are, ''
I live in Australia, and got mine for au$460 and have been quite plesed with it, I know the L version is better, but here in Aus its about 1000k more expensive,and my bank is not that deep,Colin

Donkas1946 Loc: Southern NH

Prior to getting the 70-300L I did have the 70-300 which at the time I purchased it was described by someone on UHH as an "L" lens in disguise so if you want that range until you can afford the best I would not hesitate in getting the non L in the mean time. If you can get used (which I seen on Craigslist for pretty short money or canon site for refurb you get most if not all your money back when you sell it to get the best. Just thought.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

I agree. If the OP has the budget then the 70-300 L is excellent. Good used ones are out there. I sold mine, in perfect condition, for $1,000 when I bought my 100-400 L II.

Bushymonster Loc: Oklahoma City. OK.

I bought a Canon lens 75-300 4-5 lens for 199.99 new. I must have a different5. lens than the Canon 4-5 than you you are talking about. I don't know anything but what is on the lens. Can I get more information about the lens than what is on the lens because mine was on sale at Best Buy and Conn's matched the price so I was able to charge it. Is this a good lens or what? I have taken a lot of pictures and it shoots nice.
-Bushy

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

The baby bighorn was at full 300 mm. Location was a feeding station, so very close :) In the below topic, #1 at 70 mm, and #2 at 130 mm.

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-285241-1.html

MEB540 Loc: New Jersey

Just to give you another option the Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di VC USD has proved to be a great lens with great IS. I decided to purchase it instead of the 70-300 is and have been very happy with my selection. It is not up to the level of the L lens but it compares very nicely next to the 70-300is lens.

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

I own a 75-300 and have had nothing but good results with it. Just curious: Why replace it?

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Be certain you are getting feedback pertinent to your question. One response talks about the 75-300mm USM III, but that appears to be a different model than yours, with better USM focusing and costing a bit more.

The 75-300mm III (not USM and not IS) that you have is the cheapest telezoom that Canon makes, with a list price under $200 separately and commonly selling for even less in kits or bundles. It has comparatively weak image quality and poor AF performance, mediocre build quality.

But even the least of modern Canon lenses are capable of pretty good image quality under ideal conditions. Would the 70-300 IS USM offer better? Yes.... There would be incremental improvement. Only you can say if it's dramatic enough to make it worth the difference in price. Look for test shots done with the lens at www.The-Digital-Picture.com. You can compare it closely with your current lens there. Look for better IQ wide open, vs stopped down. Look for flare, CA and distortion effects. Also ergonomics, such as whether or not the lens front element rotates when focused and whether or not the lens is internal focusing/zooming, what size filters it uses, etc.

Another big plus with the 70-300 IS USM is that you'd be getting IS stabilization. That can be quite helpful with longer teles like these, particularly if using them handheld a lot and especially when using them on a crop sensor camera.

A USM focus drive lens also will be a better match for a the high performance AF system of a 7D Mark II, for action/sports photography, for example.

If you don't need full frame coverage of an EF lens, the two 55-250mm may be worth considering. For just a little a bit more money, the EF-S 55-250 IS II gives better image quality while the EF-S 55-250 IS STM gives both better image quality and better AF performance (faster, smoother, quieter).

STM or "Stepper Motor" focus is faster than micro motor, tho not quite as fast as USM or "Ultrasonic Motor"... STM is a little smoother and quieter than USM, making STM particularly good if wanting to shoot video.

The EF 70-300 IS USM is also a better performing lens in all respects, as well as better built (although it's not L-quality build). At about $650 list price, it's an EF lens and full frame capable.

There are also the very compact EF 70-300 DO IS USM and the premium EF 70-300L IS USM, with typical L-series build/sealing/durability... both of which sell for well above $1000. The 70-300L has a feature I always look for on a long telephoto... a tripod mounting collar. None of the other lenses above can be fitted with a collar.

Also in this class there are the four Canon 70-200Ls and the 100-400L II. All of these are USM and either come with or can be fitted with a tripod collar. All have IS, too, except for two of the lower cost 70-200s.

Almost too many choices! Decide which features you need and that should help you narrow it down. If also open to used and refurbished, there are even more models to consider. Do a lot of research and very careful to any feedback is specific to the particular model or models you're looking at.