02-04-2008, 12:23 PM

Is this lens terrible, decent, blah??? If I can pick up a used one for $100.. is that a good deal? great deal? bad deal?

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-75-300mm.../dp/B00004THCZ

Thanks for any info.

02-04-2008, 01:26 PM

It's an entry-level consumer zoom lens. Image quality is ok, but if you're serious about photography, I would recommend spending the extra money on the newer 70~300IS lens:

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-300mm...2149334&sr=8-1

Yes, it's a much more expensive lens, but the image quality is much superior, and it comes with the latest generation image stabilization system, which is a must for slow telephoto lenses like this, as camera shake can frequently ruin your images.

A problem with all of these Canon consumer zooms in this focal range is that the front element rotates when it focuses. If you ever intend to use a polarizing filter with this lens, it can be very aggravating.

02-04-2008, 02:00 PM

Way to sneak that Amazon referrer link into a post. Nice work!

02-04-2008, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by ChrisF79

Way to sneak that Amazon referrer link into a post. Nice work!

And your point is?

02-04-2008, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by ChrisF79

Way to sneak that Amazon referrer link into a post. Nice work!

What???? it's a link to amazon that has all the specs on the lens. I don't even know what you are accuseing me of.. spam? Or maybe you think I make money if you click a link. lol

Would you prefer I type all the info myself???

02-04-2008, 03:11 PM

You should really check out the photography on the net forums. If that's the lens I'm thinking of, it's of mediocre quality and you're better off spending the money on something else. Then again, purchasing a high quality telephoto lens can be expensive. If you really want a lens to be proud of, either save your money or just outright buy one of these:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...arch&Q=*&bhs=t

$539 after instant rebate. Used will probably be a little cheaper. It's a "pro" quality lens, has an excellent build, and despite the fact that it's 100mm shorter on the long side it's probably one of the sharpest zooms made for a Canon camera. I believe even the 70-200 f/2.8L (non IS) has to be stepped down a spot or two to match it, it's just a constant aperture of 2.8 which makes it more expensive and desired.

And you can always pick up a 1.4x tc for under $300 that will extend the range.

I don't know if you've looked at this lens before, but don't you hate it when some one shows you something like this.

02-04-2008, 03:35 PM

Originally Posted by Village Idiot

You should really check out the photography on the net forums. If that's the lens I'm thinking of, it's of mediocre quality and you're better off spending the money on something else. Then again, purchasing a high quality telephoto lens can be expensive. If you really want a lens to be proud of, either save your money or just outright buy one of these:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...arch&Q=*&bhs=t

$539 after instant rebate. Used will probably be a little cheaper. It's a "pro" quality lens, has an excellent build, and despite the fact that it's 100mm shorter on the long side it's probably one of the sharpest zooms made for a Canon camera. I believe even the 70-200 f/2.8L (non IS) has to be stepped down a spot or two to match it, it's just a constant aperture of 2.8 which makes it more expensive and desired.

And you can always pick up a 1.4x tc for under $300 that will extend the range.

I don't know if you've looked at this lens before, but don't you hate it when some one shows you something like this.

I have looked at it for quite a while actually... And I will probably end up just getting that... my question is this: In that link.. there are 2 different models that look to have the same exact specs.. other than country of origin... What is the difference???

02-04-2008, 03:41 PM

Good recommendation Village. Apart from the 100mm deficit on the long end, the quality of the 70~200 will blow away the 70~300IS.

Only difference among the two 70~200 lenses is whether or not it was officially imported to the U.S. by Canon. They are both made in Japan at the same factory. With the "imported" version, you are getting what is referred to as gray market goods, which means that if you have to make a warranty claim, then the dealer (B&H) and not Canon U.S.A., will deal with any warranty repairs. In this case, get the cheaper version imported by and warranted by Canon U.S.A.

02-04-2008, 03:51 PM

Thank you both!

02-04-2008, 04:12 PM

NP.

Keep in mind though, that B&H sells imported versions of most lenses from foreign manufactures, the only reason the Canon's officially imported on is cheaper right now is because of the rebate. Normally the "USA" lenses can be $50-$100 more depening on the overall cost of the lens. Is it worth it? That's for you to decide.

02-04-2008, 06:38 PM

I have it... I liked it when I first got it, but as I got into more advanced photography, I realised it was a pretty bad lens. So it's good for people just starting. Anything more than that and you won't be happy. Very slow focusing and it produces a pretty low quality picture - soft focus and what-not.

02-05-2008, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by Leukeh

I have it... I liked it when I first got it, but as I got into more advanced photography, I realised it was a pretty bad lens. So it's good for people just starting. Anything more than that and you won't be happy. Very slow focusing and it produces a pretty low quality picture - soft focus and what-not.

Fortunately my first experience with photography included a Quantary 70-300 for my minolta maxxum about 8 years ago, so I decided with the new DSLR obssesion to only buy cheap glass if it was completely justified. And it's gotten expensive from there. Fortunately I have two more pieces on my list and a 5D and then I should be good to go.

02-05-2008, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by Leukeh

I have it... I liked it when I first got it, but as I got into more advanced photography, I realised it was a pretty bad lens. So it's good for people just starting. Anything more than that and you won't be happy. Very slow focusing and it produces a pretty low quality picture - soft focus and what-not.

Bad lens, you say? Youch!

Don't buy it RiDE...

02-05-2008, 10:26 AM

Originally Posted by MacHeadCase

Bad lens, you say? Youch!

Don't buy it RiDE...

Great info!! Thanks MHC! I am passing... I think I'll get the 70-200 f/4 L in a month or two instead. I am heading to Las Vegas for a week, and thought a new lens would be fun while I'm there.

02-05-2008, 10:28 AM

Good choice! Don't make the mistake I did!