replacing my canon 75-300
Mar 28, 2018 05:46:43 #
Photocraig wrote:
If you choose the EF 70-300 II lens you will be getting a very good lens. See Ken Rockwell's review. I upgraded from the older 70-300 IS USM i had for 25 years. From the little I've read, the 55-250 is generally of the same quality as the 75-300. I'd speculate that your IQ and performance would mimic the shortcomings of the 75-300, so I don't expect there will be a net gain for you.
I don't know how accurate these test results are, but this shows a pretty decent improvement comparing the 75-300 to the 55-250.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=776&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=2&LensComp=856&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=2
Mar 28, 2018 13:12:05 #
Hi Peter,
I follow your posts, so I knew your intentions were good. I believe that was the same lens that stood the test of time for quire a long time. As we know Canon will release a II model for teh better lenses over time, and it had taken quite a while for them to re-work this one. As far as teh OP is concerned, I would think finding a used version of the older model would be a very good upgrade over the 75-300.
As for performance, most of the consumer and enthusiast level lenses are concerned--like this one, they aren't on their best at the extremes of Focal Length OR aperture. For this focal length, a really sharpness at 300mm costs a minimum of twice the price plus $100. And for top extreme performance we're looking at the "L" category which would cost, even used +/- $1200.
Photojournalists used the 35-300 and the newer 28-300 to good effect. But that white paint and red ring are accompanied with a hefty price tag.
By the way, I was overjoyed back in the 90's to have IS!
I follow your posts, so I knew your intentions were good. I believe that was the same lens that stood the test of time for quire a long time. As we know Canon will release a II model for teh better lenses over time, and it had taken quite a while for them to re-work this one. As far as teh OP is concerned, I would think finding a used version of the older model would be a very good upgrade over the 75-300.
As for performance, most of the consumer and enthusiast level lenses are concerned--like this one, they aren't on their best at the extremes of Focal Length OR aperture. For this focal length, a really sharpness at 300mm costs a minimum of twice the price plus $100. And for top extreme performance we're looking at the "L" category which would cost, even used +/- $1200.
Photojournalists used the 35-300 and the newer 28-300 to good effect. But that white paint and red ring are accompanied with a hefty price tag.
By the way, I was overjoyed back in the 90's to have IS!
Mar 28, 2018 13:25:30 #
Photocraig wrote:
Hi Peter, br I follow your posts, so I knew your i... (show quote)
Seems like we're on the same page. The limited budget is always a factor. I was frankly surprised to find out about the 1995 EF 75-300 IS lens. It seems to have come from the same stable as the more recent EF 70-300 versions, of which I have the 2005 version. The cheaper EF 75-300 lenses are not cut from the same cloth.
Alan's find of a relatively inexpensive used EF 70-300mm IS (2005 version) at B&H was a decent price, but a scratched front element would give me cause for concern.
Bargains can be found, but it takes patience and persistence.
Take care.
Mar 28, 2018 16:13:41 #
You can get a 70-300L IS in excellent used condition for $800. This may seem high but you get soo many keepers.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.