Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by The_Eagle_Has_Landed, Apr 3, 2005.
going on a drebble
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Zoom Lens
It's OK. I have a d70 and use a 70-300 G type with the same aperture minimums. You'll probably get some falloff at the full zoom, which is to be expected from cheapish glass. And it'll be kind of loud and probably slow. In the end, I'd look for one of the IS lenses. It'll serve great, there's no question about that! The question is how good do you really want?
It's not crap, bu tit's not the best. It's really nothing that special. Good secondary to the kit lens with teh rebel though.
there is a tamron with the same specs and its better according to my local camera shop
you should look at b&h they are cheaper than that place
Tamron Zoom Telephoto AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 LD Macro Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS
im willing to bet the tamron is not as sharp..i have a tamron 28-105 and its not quite as sharp as the kit lens, but its close and does the trick and the images come out nicely especially with some photoshop help
The Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens is a relatively small, very light and very cheap lens for this focal length range.
The Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens is really cheap. Sometimes you get what you pay for - unfortunately this is the case with the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens.
Build quality of the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens is mediocre (and this may be a generous rating). Lightness is the benefit, but you won't find the zoom and focus rings to be smooth. I wouldn't want to subject the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens to any abuse. I doubt it would survive.
Image quality from the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens is mediocre.
The Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens is soft wide open at all focal lengths. Sharpness decreases as it zooms from 70mm to 300mm. However, the corners are softest at 70 and getting better by 300.
Corner and center softness decrease as the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens is stopped down.
Stopping down a relatively slow lens means a lot of light (or a flash) is necessary for handheld photos. Handholding a slow lens at 300mm requires a lot of light to begin with.
A 7-blade aperture is a decent feature.
The Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens is most comparable to the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens. Image quality is very similar between the two. Of course, IS can offset part of the handholding dilemma.
The Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens suffers from CA (Chromatic Aberration). Pincushioning is visible at 300mm. Focus speed is OK, but not fast.
I would go for a Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens
he is asking about a sub $200 lens and you bust out with a suggestion for a white one...there is obviously no comparaison...come on...
I agree. People should really pay attention to peoples requirements. All too often I see people ask for advice, and then someone says "x-lens is better". Sure its better, but for the hundreds more you spend on it, it better be.
Personally I own the IS version of the lens you speak of. It gives decent results, but obviously isn't L series glass.
I just picked up the IS version from B&H. Like the lens, but it is pretty soft at 300mm
here's one from this evening in the back yard. Very low light and hand held but you get the idea...
one more from last night:
Both were taken fully extended, but in low light