| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/03/2008 02:14:31 AM · #1 |
i am seeing the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III on amazon for $109. Now keeping in mind i am nothing more than an amateur hobbyist and will never do this for a living is this a good lens for me, the price seems to good to be true.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 02:28:20 AM · #2 |
I had this lens a couple of years ago, and ended up giving it to one of my buddies who recently took up photography.
While i did learn a lot (it was one of my first lenses) it had very slow AF, and tended to hunt a lot (especially in lower light). That said, if you intend to use it on bright days... you can't go wrong for the price. |
|
|
|
01/03/2008 02:28:21 AM · #3 |
since you seem to be online how bout this one for 100 more?
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
Message edited by author 2008-01-03 02:29:12.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 02:30:45 AM · #4 |
| I'd guess that the USM would be a big boost in the AF performance. The non-USM tended to actually "clunk" every now & then. |
|
|
|
01/03/2008 02:32:03 AM · #5 |
If $$$ is not to much of a factor the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 IS USM is a much better lens but it's priced in the mid $500 range. The lens your talking about is very soft from what I have read and from hearsay. I have not owned the 75-300 so can't say for sure. But if the mid $500 range is a little to high I suggest the Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II for Canon (price around $360). It's gives you great range and the quality will be better than the 75-300. Of course this is an opinion but I owned the Tamron before I purchased my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8.
Just a few things to take in consideration. Again this my opinion, you may want to wait till someone that owns or has owned the 75-300 to give you first hand input.
Hope this helps.
SDW |
|
|
|
01/03/2008 02:32:14 AM · #6 |
Jason,
I have this but must admit I hardly ever put it on my camera. I will say that with a good tripod it takes great images, but I rarely need the length and it's too heavy to use handheld just for the 75mm.
What distance are you looking for? |
|
|
|
01/03/2008 02:33:48 AM · #7 |
Jason, may I ask what you plan to do with the lens? That would be most helpful in deciding it's usefulness.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 02:34:07 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by iamwoman:
Jason,
I have this but must admit I hardly ever put it on my camera. I will say that with a good tripod it takes great images, but I rarely need the length and it's too heavy to use handheld just for the 75mm.
What distance are you looking for? |
really i am just looking for a zoom, period. all i have right now is the kit lens (crap) and the "nifty 50" which i love, and yes unfortunately price IS a factor.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 02:34:57 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Jason, may I ask what you plan to do with the lens? That would be most helpful in deciding it's usefulness. |
i guess if i had to choose one thing it would be to get better shots of MT Rainier which is fairly close by
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 02:37:30 AM · #10 |
Actually - now that I'm looking into it, I don't see a non-USM version of that lens.
What I did find was IS vs. non-IS
Try checking these reviews to compare:
Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM |
|
|
|
01/03/2008 03:44:16 AM · #11 |
Jason - I do have this lens (I have just replaced it with the 70-200 f4 IS L - at a lot more price wise).
Yes - this lens does have limitations (thats why I replaced it) and some other lenses would be better (the 70-300 IS for example)but for the price and if you are just after something to fill the need for the moment - go for it.
The 300mm reach is good - ok - not cystal clear - but you still can get some reasonable shots with it.
I have a few in my portfolio - you can judge for yourself. "Threes a crowd", "Banana-eater" were taken at 1600 ISO (so a it grainy), "On the corner" and "Nobbies" taken on this lens at a lower ISO. Sure - they could be better - but they might give you an idea of what the lens will do.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 03:52:05 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by smardaz:
really i am just looking for a zoom, period. all i have right now is the kit lens (crap) and the "nifty 50" which i love, and yes unfortunately price IS a factor. |
It is okayish. If you are on a budget and just trying to explore the higher focal distances, take it. Once you've explored the 75-300 range, you get a clearer image of what your are looking for. Then sell it and buy a better one once you have sufficient funds.
Message edited by author 2008-01-03 03:52:43.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 07:31:57 AM · #13 |
| i'm of the opinion that you should buy the best lenses possible---the bodies will constantly change but the lenses should last a while |
|
|
|
01/03/2008 09:36:00 AM · #14 |
The sigma 70-300 APO DG is the king of the budget 70-300 lens (my opinion) and it can be had new for a little over $200. It knocks the socks off the Canon versions.
I often carry mine instead of my 70-200 L or 100-400 L when weight and size is a factor and I don't feel the results suffer that much.
It takes pretty good macros too.
Message edited by author 2008-01-03 09:36:23.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 09:48:14 AM · #15 |
Used the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM for about a week, & returned it, so I don\'t have extensive experience. The regular low prices on it are always attractive, and a $100 price may make it very appealing.
The lens is not that bad, has reach, also decent close focus, but to be sure - not sharp & build is on par - a bit better to the Canon 50 1.8. It would be suitable & useful as a utility for low res web, and actually might make a somewhat usable soft portrait lens. Like many tele lenses it has excellent, smooth, & I think beautiful Bokeh at wide aperture.
But it is a low end zoom, and for the same regular price, there are some canon primes which might be better investments.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2008 10:24:44 AM · #16 |
I have the IS version of the 75-300. I carry it when I don't feel like weight lifting the 100-400 or would rather be a little more inconspicuous. As long as you work within the limitations of the lens you can get some very good shots.
Message edited by author 2008-01-03 10:26:02. |
|
|
|
01/03/2008 12:54:34 PM · #17 |
thanks much everyone, you've given me alot to think about,very useful.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/29/2025 02:57:33 PM EST.
