What is the difference between the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III and the older model EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 II?
1400243
I was curious myself, so this is what I found on "Wikipedia" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_75-300mm_lens It looks as though there's not much difference. The "II" minimum aperture is f/45. The "III" minimum aperture is f/32 to f/45. Neither model have "IS" (Image Stabilizer) nor "USM" (Ultra Sonic Motor) which is fine for me, because I almost always use a tripod with any telephoto lens
897367
Must be a typo - I googled it for info looked up part numbers etc. It is a Canon 75-300mm.
38404
I believe that the 75-300mm lens is non-USM. I do not see the letters anywhere on the lens. The neat thing about the lens is that is can be either manual or auto focus. There is so much to this camera, probably too much for my poor brain, that I am taking a camera class to figure out exactly what this thing does. Good Luck.
1069243
I own both. This is sharper and faster to focus than the 70-300. With either lens, "faster" is not a consideration. Both lenses are sharpest at f8 and require plenty of bright light. BTW, the lens hood from the 70-300 works on this version for those wondering...
1200245
I'm going to suggest a different question. Do you really want a newer version? I recently bought a used 300mm F4 for 950. Its sells new for around 1300. This lens has been due for replacement for quite some time. So i had to ask myself the same question you have, when will a replacement come out, because it is certainly overdue. Problem is, when it does come out, it will be of lesser build quality, it will remove the aperature ring(G lens), add VR, and cost well over 2000. While I would like the VR on this lens, is it worth the huge proce difference, and the reduced build quality. I also used the same logic on a 17-35 i just bought. So what I would suggest, is to judge the current lens on its merits. The only gripe I would have with this lens is that it is AF and not AF-s. It will be much cheaper than a new one, probably much better build quality, and who knows when a replacement might arrive.
1873697
The 75-300mm doesn't have Image Stabilization, has (I believe) a different lens grouping, and this has a wider focal length giving you more flexibility as a "walk-around" lens. In basic terms...-Can zoom really wide and really far in, compared to the very zoomed in 75-300mm.-Has image stabilization; good for non shaky video.-better lens grouping.
2033852
Thank you for your time. In regards to your inquiry, the 75-300mm III lens is in fact AF. In addition, the Canon T3 does have a built-in flash. Please feel free to contact us at 800-991-3350 if you have any additional questions.
2228078
There are 2 lenses with similar names. The newest is the 18-250 f 3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM. The older lens does not have the MACRO in the name. The newest lens has better Macro capabilities and is smaller and lighter. I got the newest lens and I love it. See www.dpreview.com for a review of the lenses.
1580973
Michael, The one I got a few months back is the US warranty version. I have purchased quite a few Canon lenses on Amazon and they have all be US versions.
2184845
I do not know which other lens you are talking about. My guess is it has the same specs as this one also by Canon. They are versions of the same lens. The one whose page you are on is newer. The old one has a 67 mm diameter the new one 72 mm. New one has updated focal elements but it's roughly the same.
1489923
Both RMR's are the same dimensions externally. These numbers refer to the area the internal sighting dot subtends. The 3.25 is a smaller dot and would be used for a precision shot under target or range conditions. The 6.5 is twice as large, and would be used for combat or competition shooting at high speed. The larger dot on the lens is quicker for the eye to locate during a rapid draw and presentation of the weapon to the target. Most seem to prefer the 6.5 and it works very well. I prefer the 3.25 as I shoot more precision than combat. I hope this helps.
108982
The Contemporary version according to "http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma-17-70mm-f2-8-4-os-hsm" is smaller, lighter, and uses revised optics compared to the old version which is why I choose this contemporary version. I use it on a Rebel T3i and I am very happy with the results.
1176975
Barry, I have a Cannon 6d and a Cannon 75-300, 1:4-5.6 and the converter works just fine. The manufacturer states that the converter is not compatible with EF-S lenses. I've not used the converter extensively, but I am happy with the few pictures that I have taken. Hope this helps.
233940
It looks like the "#883-101" is a newer version for the same model. You may not be able to buy "#880-101". I did a comparison of these two versions and here are differences [values for #883-101], (values for #880-101): 1. Angle View: [69.3 - 5.7], (76.5 - 6.5) 2. Minimum Focus Distance: [13.8" (35.05 cm)], (1.48' (45 cm)) 3. Elements/Groups: [13/16], (18/14) 4. Filter Thread: [62 mm], (72 mm) 5. Dimensions (DxL): [Approx. 2.9x3.5" (7.37x8.89 cm)], (Approx. 3.1x4.0" (7.87x10.16 cm)) 6. Weight: [1.04 lb. (470g)], (1.39 lb. (630g)) - Most of other features are the same. I hope this will be helpful.
1264648
This is the older version. The newest version is much sharper, focuses more accurately, and is definitely the lens you want to purchase.
1424952
Yes, but only the EF-S 18-55mm IS II Lens has it the other lens (Canon EF 75-300mm III Lens) doesnt have
79348
I have used a 70-300mm EF and a 55-300mm AF lens with my D5100. Though the 70-300mm EF is a higher grade lens, I think that upon looking back at my results, the 55-300mm AF lens option gave me clearer images than the 70-300mm lens does. You will, however, be happy with either one. My 55-300mm lens was stolen last summer and I replaced it with a refurbished 70-300mm EF lens. If I were going to do it again, I'd probably get another 55-300mm lens. But on the other hand, the 70-300mm lens has a larger lens aperture and so it works better under lower light conditions than the 55-300mm AF lens. Life always seems to be about choices and trade-offs doesn't it.I hope this was helpful. I have used a 70-300mm EF and a 55-300mm AF lens with my D5100. Though the 70-300mm EF is a higher grade lens, I think that upon looking back at my results, the 55-300mm AF lens option gave me clearer images than the 70-300mm lens does. You will, however, be happy with either one. My 55-300mm lens was stolen last summer and I replaced it with a refurbished 70-300mm EF lens. If I were going to do it again, I'd probably get another 55-300mm lens. But on the other hand, the 70-300mm lens has a larger lens aperture and so it works better under lower light conditions than the 55-300mm AF lens.... » Read More I have used a 70-300mm EF and a 55-300mm AF lens with my D5100. Though the 70-300mm EF is a higher grade lens, I think that upon looking back at my results, the 55-300mm AF lens option gave me clearer images than the 70-300mm lens does. You will, however, be happy with either one. My 55-300mm lens was stolen last summer and I replaced it with a refurbished 70-300mm EF lens. If I were going to do it again, I'd probably get another 55-300mm lens. But on the other hand, the 70-300mm lens has a larger lens aperture and so it works better under lower light conditions than the 55-300mm AF lens. Life always seems to be about choices and trade-offs doesn't it.I hope this was helpful. « Show Less