Thinking about getting these for my 1st telephoto lens for my 70D, but what's difference between this lens and Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM?? UD??
1380191
I use this lens with my Canon 3Ti. I had been using the 70-300 mm but wanted to capture more detail on birds. If you can get close, the detail on the 300 mm L lens is much sharper than on the zoom. You lose versatility when you go to the fixed focal length, but your photos will be much sharper. I do love my 300 mm L lens even though it's heavier.
1380192
Partially in response to Paula J's answer below, I have had both lenses. The 70-300L is actually sharper in the center than the fixed 300L prime. The 300L prime is sharper on the edges and corners. If you want the F4 aperture at 300mm, then you have to go with the prime. If you don't need this, then newer 70-300L. It is lighter, more compact, has a better image stabilizer and gives you the versatility of a zoom.
1380193
The EF300 is a fixed focal length telephoto, the 70/300 is a zoom lens. The 300 is good for sports and wildlife. Be advised if you use a multiplier you loose the image stabilizer. Still a good entry lens.
1380194
I purchased this lens for my husband. He wanted a fixed lens, not a zoom. It takes great pictures. However, the Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS USM looks like a beautiful lens, and if this is your first, perhaps it is more versatile for your needs.
1380195
This lens will let 2x more light in than the zoom at 300mm and the images should be sharper.
207492
Yes and no. The EF 75-300mm IS USM is a much better quality lens. You get what you pay for. If you intend to use the lens without a tripod then you would absolutely need the image stabilization. That said, I would look at refurbished lenses on the Canon website. You can get this lens for $519.99. I purchased one from there and I am totally happy with the purchase. Hope this helps.
189243
J. ONeill says: Did you make a decision? I am currently debating the same two lenses. I am leaning towards the Canon since it seems there are quite a few quality/AF issues with the Sigma. Any advice is appreciated. If you own a camera with micro focus adjustment like the 50D or 7D, Sigmas front or back focusing is a non-issue. Also, even if you don't own a camera with micro focus adjustment, if you get a Sigma lens that front or back focuses, you can send it to Sigma for calibration.
1337629
Image quality between the 24-70 and 28-75 is leaps and bounds. The 24-70 is just as sharp as Canons 24-70 version. Not to mention having VC. Definitely worth it if you have the money. I owned the 28-75 and it was a great lens for what is was but the 24-70 is such a step up in my opinion. Cheers
910058
Photofun123-I am in a similar situation. What did you decide on and what do you think of it? I will be getting a 50d and only one lens. My main subject will be my toddler. I am considering 24-70 and 24-105. Thanks.
1429332
For travel, I like carrying the Canon 15-85mm IS USM. But I also own the 70-200 f/4L IS USM and use it for performances, etc. The 70-200's image quality was very eye opening for me. This lens will show you exactly what your camera is capable of and you will not be able to go back to cheap lenses afterwards.
921475
Don't have. http://m.dpreview.com/products/canon/lenses/canon_28-200_3p5-5p6_usm
1742136
If you want sharper images and faster focusing, you might instead consider getting one of the Canon 70-200mm f/4L USM models. The difference in image quality can be quite a startling. Back (WAY back) when I was looking to upgrade my old telephoto lens, someone gave me excellent advice that the difference between the newer telephotos I was considering was relatively small - too small to agonize over - and that if I really wanted to upgrade, I should just bite the bullet and get the L. One of the best pieces of advice on equipment I ever got. Once I tried the L, I never looked back. The one drawback is that the lens will spoil you forever.
1316302
I also own a 300mm f/4L IS. I use it with a Canon 7D. The 70-300 mm f.4-5.6 L IS (note the L, which means professional quality lens) is used with a Canon Rebel T4i. The two systems give about the same quality pictures, but I have never done one-to-one comparisons where the same body is used with both lenses on the same subject with the same lighting. The consumer zoom lens (without the L) is nowhere near as good as either professional lens.
1790371
Yes, the two lenses are worlds apart. The 70-300 is a top quality 'prosumer' lens, intended for advanced amateurs and pros on a budget; worth every penny! The 55-200 is an affordable, 'entry level' lens and an excellent value.
2219452
I agree with "sammy". Even if you get close enough to your target, whether through the use of a blind or other means, the lens quality from the 70-300 to the EF series lenses is considerable. Lens quality aside, the ability to "get close" without "being close" is one of the keys to great wildlife photography. The further away from an animal or bird you are, the more likely it will remain calm and stick around. While most of the Canon fixed telephoto lenses in the EF series remain out of reach for all but the dedicated professional, the zoom lenses in the series are reasonably priced and provide excellent results. Additionally, the extra 100mm on the 100-400 will prove to be very useful, especially around skittish wildlife like hawks and other raptors, and dangerous big game such as bears, elk and moose.
1939651
For one thing you don't have the full range as the 28/300... Which is an all around lens. I would say the 70/200 being 2.8 captures great shots that you are planning for in that range, Unlike the other where the shots might be wide angle to zoom changing frequently.
1630105
So, I'm looking to upgrade from the Canon EF-S 55-250 ISII lens that I currently shoot my daughter's soccer and outdoor nature scenes. I know this is an entry level L, still the price is hard to complain about. How much of a difference from my current lens (on a 70D) will this make, and will I still be able to shoot fairly clean/crisp images @ 200mm without IS? I can use a monopod, so I'm sure that would help. Thoughts?
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.
410989
Thanks for the information. I was using a Canon 28-135 IS USM as my walk around travel lens and loved it until it got stolen in an airport! :-( Now I'm in the market for a new lens and I'm leaning towards the Tamron. I've used their lens in my past photography life with my old AE-1 Program and I'd LOVE the 18-270 if I can swing the $$$. I'm hunting eBay as well, as that's where I got my 28-135 and had NO problems with it at all!
180261
I have a new 6D, and I have always used fixed fast lens. I think the 28mm f 1.8 USM is a better buy, its much faster and easier to get, and can find for 50 to 75 bucks less. the 35 and 50 are great, and a sleeper that easy to get is a 100mm f 2.0 it has taken some of my best photos, a great price too. Good Luck
1272577
For a general walk-around lens on a crop camera like the Rebels or 40D, etc, I find that 28mm is just too limited in terms of wide angle. Not very good for shooting a room full of people either. 28mm isn't too bad if you're ONLY shooting people. My recommendation would be to go for the 17-50 and get an image stabilized telephoto for longer shots like the Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS, Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM or Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS.