Need Some Hellp choosing a Canon Lens

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by CoolPix, Jul 21, 2007.

  1. CoolPix

    CoolPix Guest

    Some hellp here would be nice. I have a Canon 30D with a 17-85 IS
    Lens. I am using a older Canon 75-300 UltraSonic lens from my SLR.

    I have been looking at upgrading to a newer Lens, as i like shooting
    birds. I see that there are two lens that Canon makes a 70-300 IS USM
    lens and the EF 75-300 IS USM f4-5.6 Lens.

    Can someone tell me as there is about a $100 difference in the two
    lens, which one should i buy. Or does someone have any suggestions.

    I would assume that there is a big difference in the new lens and my
    old lens?

    Thanks in Advance
    CoolPix
     
    CoolPix, Jul 21, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. CoolPix

    Rich Guest

    On Jul 21, 8:53 am, CoolPix <> wrote:
    > Some hellp here would be nice. I have a Canon 30D with a 17-85 IS
    > Lens. I am using a older Canon 75-300 UltraSonic lens from my SLR.
    >
    > I have been looking at upgrading to a newer Lens, as i like shooting
    > birds. I see that there are two lens that Canon makes a 70-300 IS USM
    > lens and the EF 75-300 IS USM f4-5.6 Lens.
    >
    > Can someone tell me as there is about a $100 difference in the two
    > lens, which one should i buy. Or does someone have any suggestions.
    >
    > I would assume that there is a big difference in the new lens and my
    > old lens?
    >
    > Thanks in Advance
    > CoolPix


    Buy the one with ED glass. If neither have it, don't buy either.
     
    Rich, Jul 21, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. CoolPix wrote:
    > Some hellp here would be nice. I have a Canon 30D with a 17-85 IS
    > Lens. I am using a older Canon 75-300 UltraSonic lens from my SLR.
    >
    > I have been looking at upgrading to a newer Lens, as i like shooting
    > birds. I see that there are two lens that Canon makes a 70-300 IS USM
    > lens and the EF 75-300 IS USM f4-5.6 Lens.


    If you search back in the archives, you'll see this topic
    discussed often.

    In my opinion, keep your present lens and save for a significantly
    better lens. The lenses you propose are not much different
    than the one you have.

    > Can someone tell me as there is about a $100 difference in the two
    > lens, which one should i buy. Or does someone have any suggestions.


    Neither.

    > I would assume that there is a big difference in the new lens and my
    > old lens?


    No, very little difference.

    To step up in quality means go the following route:

    1) Get IS which will be a big help in photographing action
    both hand held and on a tripod at high magnifications.

    2) 300mm is a good starting point.

    3) With a 30D (a very good wildlife camera), you need good
    lenses for action.

    A good starter lens: 300 mm f/4 L IS and add a 1.4x TC to give
    420 mm f/5.6 IS.

    A sharp lens and fast autofocus for tracking birds but no IS:
    Canon 400 mm f/5.6.

    A sharp all around lens that covers your zoom range above
    would be the 70-200 f/4 L IS (or f/2.8 L IS).

    The step up in quality in the above lenses is in several ways:
    sharper lens, faster f/ratio, sharper wide open, faster autofocus,
    and rugged build.

    Above 300 mm forget zoom (except Nikon owners have a wonderful
    Nikon zoom lens at about $5000; Canon has no similar quality lens).

    Roger
    some bird photos:
    http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird
     
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Jul 21, 2007
    #3
  4. CoolPix

    Matalog Guest

    "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <> wrote in
    message news:...
    > CoolPix wrote:
    >> Some hellp here would be nice. I have a Canon 30D with a 17-85 IS
    >> Lens. I am using a older Canon 75-300 UltraSonic lens from my SLR. I have
    >> been looking at upgrading to a newer Lens, as i like shooting
    >> birds. I see that there are two lens that Canon makes a 70-300 IS USM
    >> lens and the EF 75-300 IS USM f4-5.6 Lens.



    I have read everywhere that the new 70-300 lens is much sharper at all
    lengths.




    >
    > If you search back in the archives, you'll see this topic
    > discussed often.
    >
    > In my opinion, keep your present lens and save for a significantly
    > better lens. The lenses you propose are not much different
    > than the one you have.
    >
    >> Can someone tell me as there is about a $100 difference in the two
    >> lens, which one should i buy. Or does someone have any suggestions.


    I have the 70-300 IS USM lens and it is a very good lens. I have a 400d
    (with low pass filter in front of the sensor, and I shoot in RAW), so not
    every shot I shoot comes out looking amazing at 100%(but I'm sure that a lot
    of people would be happy with the quality), but with some sharpening (in
    ACR) the images look great.




    >
    > Neither.
    >
    >> I would assume that there is a big difference in the new lens and my
    >> old lens?


    I don't know your old lens, but the range difference is a lot.


    >
    > No, very little difference.
    >
    > To step up in quality means go the following route:
    >
    > 1) Get IS which will be a big help in photographing action
    > both hand held and on a tripod at high magnifications.


    The lenses you are talking about have this IS.


    >
    > 2) 300mm is a good starting point.


    You will have this, with 1.6x on the focal length so 480mm for a 300mm (I
    thnk)



    >
    > 3) With a 30D (a very good wildlife camera), you need good
    > lenses for action.
    >
    > A good starter lens: 300 mm f/4 L IS and add a 1.4x TC to give
    > 420 mm f/5.6 IS.


    Very expensive and since you have been looking at the lenses you mentioned,
    I don't think you want to fork out a fortune on your new lens.



    >
    > A sharp lens and fast autofocus for tracking birds but no IS:
    > Canon 400 mm f/5.6.
    >
    > A sharp all around lens that covers your zoom range above
    > would be the 70-200 f/4 L IS (or f/2.8 L IS).


    Without the same focal length you want?



    >
    > The step up in quality in the above lenses is in several ways:
    > sharper lens, faster f/ratio, sharper wide open, faster autofocus,
    > and rugged build.
    >
    > Above 300 mm forget zoom (except Nikon owners have a wonderful
    > Nikon zoom lens at about $5000; Canon has no similar quality lens).
    >
    > Roger
    > some bird photos:
    > http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird
     
    Matalog, Jul 22, 2007
    #4
  5. CoolPix

    CoolPix Guest

    On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 10:33:49 -0600, "Roger N. Clark (change username
    to rnclark)" <> wrote:
    Thanks for that information, I was directed to look at the 70-200 F4
    Lens with L Glass and told to buy a 1.4 extender, do you know if the
    2.extender will work also?

    Thanks Clark, and great photos by the way.
    >CoolPix wrote:
    >> Some hellp here would be nice. I have a Canon 30D with a 17-85 IS
    >> Lens. I am using a older Canon 75-300 UltraSonic lens from my SLR.
    >>
    >> I have been looking at upgrading to a newer Lens, as i like shooting
    >> birds. I see that there are two lens that Canon makes a 70-300 IS USM
    >> lens and the EF 75-300 IS USM f4-5.6 Lens.

    >
    >If you search back in the archives, you'll see this topic
    >discussed often.
    >
    >In my opinion, keep your present lens and save for a significantly
    >better lens. The lenses you propose are not much different
    >than the one you have.
    >
    >> Can someone tell me as there is about a $100 difference in the two
    >> lens, which one should i buy. Or does someone have any suggestions.

    >
    >Neither.
    >
    >> I would assume that there is a big difference in the new lens and my
    >> old lens?

    >
    >No, very little difference.
    >
    >To step up in quality means go the following route:
    >
    >1) Get IS which will be a big help in photographing action
    > both hand held and on a tripod at high magnifications.
    >
    >2) 300mm is a good starting point.
    >
    >3) With a 30D (a very good wildlife camera), you need good
    > lenses for action.
    >
    >A good starter lens: 300 mm f/4 L IS and add a 1.4x TC to give
    >420 mm f/5.6 IS.
    >
    >A sharp lens and fast autofocus for tracking birds but no IS:
    >Canon 400 mm f/5.6.
    >
    >A sharp all around lens that covers your zoom range above
    >would be the 70-200 f/4 L IS (or f/2.8 L IS).
    >
    >The step up in quality in the above lenses is in several ways:
    >sharper lens, faster f/ratio, sharper wide open, faster autofocus,
    >and rugged build.
    >
    >Above 300 mm forget zoom (except Nikon owners have a wonderful
    >Nikon zoom lens at about $5000; Canon has no similar quality lens).
    >
    >Roger
    >some bird photos:
    >http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird
     
    CoolPix, Jul 22, 2007
    #5
  6. CoolPix

    Scott W Guest

    CoolPix wrote:
    > On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 10:33:49 -0600, "Roger N. Clark (change username
    > to rnclark)" <> wrote:
    > Thanks for that information, I was directed to look at the 70-200 F4
    > Lens with L Glass and told to buy a 1.4 extender, do you know if the
    > 2.extender will work also?


    The 30D needs a f/5.6 for faster lens, so starting with an f/4 the limit
    of the extender is 1.4x.

    Scott
     
    Scott W, Jul 22, 2007
    #6
  7. CoolPix

    Scott W Guest

    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
    > CoolPix wrote:
    >> Some hellp here would be nice. I have a Canon 30D with a 17-85 IS
    >> Lens. I am using a older Canon 75-300 UltraSonic lens from my SLR.
    >> I have been looking at upgrading to a newer Lens, as i like shooting
    >> birds. I see that there are two lens that Canon makes a 70-300 IS USM
    >> lens and the EF 75-300 IS USM f4-5.6 Lens.

    >
    > If you search back in the archives, you'll see this topic
    > discussed often.
    >
    > In my opinion, keep your present lens and save for a significantly
    > better lens. The lenses you propose are not much different
    > than the one you have.
    >
    >> Can someone tell me as there is about a $100 difference in the two
    >> lens, which one should i buy. Or does someone have any suggestions.

    >
    > Neither.
    >
    >> I would assume that there is a big difference in the new lens and my
    >> old lens?

    >
    > No, very little difference.
    >
    > To step up in quality means go the following route:
    >
    > 1) Get IS which will be a big help in photographing action
    > both hand held and on a tripod at high magnifications.
    >
    > 2) 300mm is a good starting point.
    >
    > 3) With a 30D (a very good wildlife camera), you need good
    > lenses for action.
    >
    > A good starter lens: 300 mm f/4 L IS and add a 1.4x TC to give
    > 420 mm f/5.6 IS.
    >
    > A sharp lens and fast autofocus for tracking birds but no IS:
    > Canon 400 mm f/5.6.
    >
    > A sharp all around lens that covers your zoom range above
    > would be the 70-200 f/4 L IS (or f/2.8 L IS).
    >
    > The step up in quality in the above lenses is in several ways:
    > sharper lens, faster f/ratio, sharper wide open, faster autofocus,
    > and rugged build.
    >
    > Above 300 mm forget zoom (except Nikon owners have a wonderful
    > Nikon zoom lens at about $5000; Canon has no similar quality lens).


    I will second the 300mm F/4 IS L lens, we have it as well as the
    70-300mm. My wife uses the 70-300, she does not like the weight of the
    300mm and she also likes the zoom. But the 300mm is far sharper, it is
    sharper at f/5.6 then the 70-300 is at f/8, and the 300mm does OK even
    at f/4.

    Here are some of my bird photos using it.
    http://www.pbase.com/konascott/birds

    This is the kind of photo that I like to take with it.
    http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/82599632/original

    Scott
     
    Scott W, Jul 22, 2007
    #7
  8. "Scott W" <> wrote:
    >
    > I will second the 300mm F/4 IS L lens, we have it as well as the 70-300mm.
    > My wife uses the 70-300, she does not like the weight of the 300mm and she
    > also likes the zoom. But the 300mm is far sharper, it is
    > sharper at f/5.6 then the 70-300 is at f/8, and the 300mm does OK even at
    > f/4.
    >
    > This is the kind of photo that I like to take with it.
    > http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/82599632/original


    But that could have been shot at 1/250 with the 70-300 at f/11 and IS for
    very similar sharpness.

    If tele work isn't your main thing, the zoom, weight, and price advantages
    are large. Also, the (relatively recent) 70-300 IS isn't all that bad* at
    f/5.6 at 300mm. (Of course, part of that is that I'd be using it on a 5D: a
    400D user would see the same image quality that I'd see with a 1.4x
    converter.)

    *: "The new lens is sharper at f5.6 than the old lens was at f8."
    http://bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/ef_70_300is_review.html

    Anyway, this relatively new lens seems to split the difference nicely
    between cheap zooms and the expensive L primes or the better of the
    expensive L zooms.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jul 22, 2007
    #8
  9. CoolPix

    DHB Guest

    On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 12:35:13 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"Scott W" <> wrote:
    >>
    >> I will second the 300mm F/4 IS L lens, we have it as well as the 70-300mm.
    >> My wife uses the 70-300, she does not like the weight of the 300mm and she
    >> also likes the zoom. But the 300mm is far sharper, it is
    >> sharper at f/5.6 then the 70-300 is at f/8, and the 300mm does OK even at
    >> f/4.
    >>
    >> This is the kind of photo that I like to take with it.
    >> http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/82599632/original

    >
    >But that could have been shot at 1/250 with the 70-300 at f/11 and IS for
    >very similar sharpness.
    >
    >If tele work isn't your main thing, the zoom, weight, and price advantages
    >are large. Also, the (relatively recent) 70-300 IS isn't all that bad* at
    >f/5.6 at 300mm. (Of course, part of that is that I'd be using it on a 5D: a
    >400D user would see the same image quality that I'd see with a 1.4x
    >converter.)
    >
    >*: "The new lens is sharper at f5.6 than the old lens was at f8."
    >http://bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/ef_70_300is_review.html
    >
    >Anyway, this relatively new lens seems to split the difference nicely
    >between cheap zooms and the expensive L primes or the better of the
    >expensive L zooms.
    >
    >David J. Littleboy
    >Tokyo, Japan
    >


    David J. Littleboy,
    That's an interesting web sight, thanks for
    sharing. I found it interesting that he likes & often travels with
    the same 2 zoom lens combination that I do.

    The 17-85mm IS & the 70-300 IS, actually I also always have my
    50mm f1.8 mkII with me also making it a 3 lens combination. The 50mm
    is my low light, mostly indoor lens & @ about ($75 US) it's a must
    have in my view.

    As for the 70-300 IS, it's a very good lens for the money & it
    does not weigh a ton either. The IS works very good & I often use it
    @ 300mm & am impressed with it's sharpness especially @ f8-f11 which
    seems to be the seat spot on my copy but even wide open it's more than
    acceptably sharp.

    Only real dislike is that the front element rotates during
    focus, making it more effort to use a polorizer or graduated ND filter
    on it. I use these lenses on both my 300D & 30D & am pleased with the
    combination.

    If money was not a limitation I would already have added the
    newer EF 70-200mm f4 IS L lens to my collection primarily for use with
    a polorizer & because it's weather sealed. I would miss the 200-300mm
    range for some things, so I would certainly keep & continue to use the
    70-300mm IS where needed.

    Side story: Mine was 1 of the lenses recalled by Canon for an
    IS defect most apparent when portrait oriented but not fully limited
    to that orientation. Canon paid postage both ways & the repair was
    free & quickly done. In took less than 2 weeks (including shipping
    time), I had my lens back fully repaired or maybe I should say
    replaced? The repair solution was to replace the entire inner optical
    unit, essentially the entire lens aside from it's outer shell.

    No complaints with it's post repair performance & that was my
    1st & hopefully only time I will have need of a Canon lens repair
    facility. Fixed focal length lenses are great "if" your subject
    affords you the ability to "zoom with your feet".

    David, I can only imagine how somebody as "short" as you must
    feel living in Japan. Best of luck & thanks for sharing your
    knowledge.

    Respectfully, DHB


    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
    or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
    is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
    to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
     
    DHB, Jul 22, 2007
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Arawak
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    2,370
    °Mike°
    Sep 26, 2003
  2. Jeff Greenfield

    Need help choosing between the canon A80 or the Canon G5

    Jeff Greenfield, Dec 5, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    352
    Mark Spatny
    Dec 5, 2003
  3. Jeff Greenfield

    Need help choosing between the canon A80 or the Canon G5

    Jeff Greenfield, Dec 4, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    308
    Jeff Greenfield
    Dec 4, 2003
  4. j

    Hellp on home nextworking

    j, Aug 15, 2006, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    473
    Jack \(MVP-Networking\).
    Aug 15, 2006
  5. Replies:
    14
    Views:
    581
    gangle
    Dec 20, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page