advertisement


Canon 70-300 zoom lens, is this any good?

It's very compact for a 300 mm, so that's good. Image stabilier is also nice. On the other hand, f/4.5-5.6 is a bit disappointing. Another downside is that the diffractive optics can give a funny look to out of focus areas. There are a couple of examples of that on this page (found by quick Google search): http://blog.dojoklo.com/2011/03/18/the-canon-70-300mm-do-travel-companion/

Quite a few years ago, I went to the local camera store and tried that lens along with a few others with similar specs. Comparing the images, I decided to get the 70-200 f/4L since the results were by far the best. I suggest you find some online reviews and try to compare the image quality against what you already have and other possible upgrades. Someone doing a direct comparison would of course be most informative. Failing that, I'd look out for any particular drawbacks mentioned in reviews. Praise will never make you not choose something, but specific criticism might.
 
I’ve no personal experience of this lens. It was pretty expensive when launched, so the low prices it commands now can probably taken as an indication of how it is viewed in general. This is one review which is not very encouraging, though it is by no means a bad lens. How it compares with your Tamron depends on which version of the Tamron you have.
https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/540-canon70300f4556doisff
Saving up for the Canon 70-300mm L lens might be a better option. i do have that one and think it is great.
As for price, check for completed listings. I have seen this lens at dealers for only £250 or so (can’t remember exactly).
 
Thanks. My thinking was the relative shortness of the lens would reduce the amount of shake, and the IS would mitigate it further. However, after reading the reviews this lens isn’t that sharp as you zoom in, which kind of defeats the object.

Whilst I’d love an L series lens, it would be hard for me to justify it, given my usage and also I’m not sure my 4000D would be up to making the most of it.

I’ve been recommended the Canon 55-250 STM, which seems to be well regarded, and is in my price range.

https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/55-250mm-stm.htm
 
Rob998 said:
Whilst I’d love an L series lens, it would be hard for me to justify it, given my usage and also I’m not sure my 4000D would be up to making the most of it.
Click to expand...
Perhaps not the most, but you'll notice the difference with any body. Mind, if you do buy one L lens, you'll likely end up wanting to upgrade your entire set. It can get expensive.
 
From personal experience of it (when I owned a 6D & 7D) Tamron have a dark horse in their stable which is the 70-300 SP VC. Sure it's not L-Series good, although comparing it to a friend's Canon 70-200 f4L IS we were very surprised at how close it really was. The only real downer with the Tamron c/w the Canon L is the quality of bokeh - not bad on the Tamron, but less chaotic on the Canon.

The VC (IS) system works really well, and the lens only starts to lose bite in terms of sharpness in the last 20mm or so as it heads towards 300mm. You'd get a very clean example for under 200 quid, and it's where my money would go.
 
There are plenty of decent used Canon 70-200mm L lenses around for under £400. I’d recommend the F/4.0. Add a 1.4 extender if you need the reach. If you ever upgrade your camera body, an L lens will stay with you and won’t lose much money, if any at all.
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
Tony Lockhart said:
There are plenty of decent used Canon 70-200mm L lenses around for under £400. I’d recommend the F/4.0. Add a 1.4 extender if you need the reach. If you ever upgrade your camera body, an L lens will stay with you and won’t lose much money, if any at all.
Click to expand...
The 70-300L lens is also simply superb and has been steady, price wise, for the past few years. I was lucky to pick one up at a steal price....

The only downside to it is that you cannot add a Canon 1.4X extender, although I believe there is a third party one that will fit.
 
i have/had the 70-300 DO, 70-200 f4, 70-300 IS (mark 2), and 70-200 f 2.8 IS. Sold 70-300 F4, and 70-300 IS mark 2 Kept 2.8 and DO. The DO is better than 70-300, worse than 70-200 f4 and 2.8 but very compact and useful. Unless you shoot landscapes and need top-notch details, it's more than capable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top