Canon Tele.Zoom lens purchase - Recommendations?

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

05/30/2007 02:51:27 PM · #1

I am considering shelling out for a first Telephoto zoom lens, because, quite frankly, at the moment, my current lenses don't exactly offer much(Max. 90mm). At the moment I don't partake much in photog of High-speed/nature subjects, but who knows what the future holds...

I am considering the following and was wondering if anyone has any thoughts/comments on them and details on performance/image quality, or, indeed alternative lens suggestions:

Canon EF 75-300mm f4/5.6 USM MK3 - Â£240 - This is obviously my first choice as a somewhat unskilled photographer(and, indeed Pricewise) - But would like to know what people think of it...

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM - Â£400 - in here because it has the obvious advantage of IS(But'll take a couple of months of saving to purchase).

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens - Â£500 - This was actually my second choice, simply because it was faster compared to the other two, but I would have to save up a little longer(Doesn't sound like much to some, but I don't have much).

Well...Thanks in advance.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

05/30/2007 02:58:33 PM · #2

Of the three, the one to avoid is the 75-300. It's quite soft at the long end, so you're forced to stop down from an already slow f/5.6, which sort of limits its usefulness.
The standout of the bunch is the 70-200 f/4. It's one of the best zooms around, period.
I've no comments on the 70-300 IS; no experience, direct or indirect.

ExcaliburVT

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

05/30/2007 03:13:00 PM · #3

I'm very pleased with my 70-300, and I have played with a 70-200. My personal feeling is that once you get up into that range you need IS, and its more important than the L rating. (Cowers expecting to get pummeled for dissing an "L" lens)

PhotoDave

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II

05/30/2007 03:16:47 PM · #4

Originally posted by ExcaliburVT:

LOL I share your opinion and I also love my 70-300 and have tried the 70-200F4L but still went with the former. On some reviews they also call the 70-300 a hidden L glass ;) of which the quality is verry close to the 70-200L. If you can though try to rent both and make up your own opinion.

-dave

cheekymunky

Canon EOS-40D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

05/30/2007 03:38:13 PM · #5

I got the 70-200 F4 new from ebay for Â£357 (PM me if you want the seller - he's a good bloke to deal with). Both image and build quality are outstanding. A friend had the older verison of the 70-300IS and it was a bit of a stinker, quite soft at 300. But I've heard nothing but good things about the newer version. Like the man said, if you could try before you buy that would be ideal!

Sting11165

Canon EOS-20D

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Canon

05/30/2007 03:52:46 PM · #6

Originally posted by cheekymunky:

I just bought a 70-200 F/4 from Amazon for $480 -- but the rebates are US-only I believe.

If you'd like to get something now, check out the Tamron 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Macro. It's image quality isn't perfect, especially on the long end (where it gets soft and CA becomes a big problem), but at $100 including shipping it is a great way to see if you are interested in telephoto. The resale value is quite good, so you could grab one, use it for a few months, and then upgrade it and get your money back out later.

Speaking of which, I may have mine for sale :)

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G VR

05/31/2007 08:24:20 PM · #7

Many thanks for the info everyone. I think I may save for a bit and go for the 70-200, Just for the fact that I've heard so many good things about it, and I can't get over the F/4 aperture.

I'm already building up a list of what I want after that... The Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS Looks quite nice, but that'll need many, many months of saving up... Or maybe something else...

I'd really love to go for the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM But at 1500 quid, that's way out of my range... That would take some major saving up... and I'd probably be afraid to use it outside...

Baxter

Nikon D500

05/31/2007 08:31:30 PM · #8

?

Message edited by author 2007-05-31 20:32:25.

MrEd

Sony DSLR-A100

Sigma 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 EX Aspherical DG DF for Minolta

05/31/2007 08:50:31 PM · #9

Sigma 100-300 f/4, Sigma 50-500 f/4-6.3 or (my choice) Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. If you choose to go with Sigma, I recommend Sigma4less.

Sigma 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 EX Aspherical DG DF for Minolta

05/31/2007 09:33:30 PM · #10

Originally posted by MrEd:

Sigma 100-300 f/4, Sigma 50-500 f/4-6.3 or (my choice) Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. If you choose to go with Sigma, I recommend Sigma4less.

Yeah, the 70-200 is nice, but it's also 750 quid. That's 250 more than the Canon, I know it's a F/2.8, but at the moment, it's just a touch out of range... But thanks for the recommendation. As to the other two, they're even more, @ Â£780 ea. I think they are a bit much.

Fan of Sigmas?

MrEd

Sony DSLR-A100

05/31/2007 10:00:21 PM · #11

Originally posted by CoinCounter:

Originally posted by MrEd:
Sigma 100-300 f/4, Sigma 50-500 f/4-6.3 or (my choice) Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. If you choose to go with Sigma, I recommend Sigma4less.

Yeah, the 70-200 is nice, but it's also 750 quid. That's 250 more than the Canon, I know it's a F/2.8, but at the moment, it's just a touch out of range... But thanks for the recommendation. As to the other two, they're even more, @ Â£780 ea. I think they are a bit much.

Fan of Sigmas?

Sorry, didn't pay attention to the prices of the others. Just threw the suggestions in there.

I have the Sigma 15-30 and Sigma 70-200...so yeah, I am a fan. Minolta lenses are pretty good, but getting hard to find and Sony's lenses are way overpriced. But, I don't regret those choices at all.

Tajhad

Canon EOS R

Canon RF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS USM

05/31/2007 10:02:20 PM · #12

There was a thread on the canons you might want to have a look at.
I hope this link works [thumb]579199[/thumb]

Tajhad

Canon EOS R

Canon RF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS USM

05/31/2007 10:03:43 PM · #13

Didn't work - try again
Canon thread

splidge

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

06/04/2007 05:48:48 PM · #14

Originally posted by CoinCounter:

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM - Â£400 - in here because it has the obvious advantage of IS(But'll take a couple of months of saving to purchase).

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens - Â£500 - This was actually my second choice, simply because it was faster compared to the other two, but I would have to save up a little longer(Doesn't sound like much to some, but I don't have much).

Another vote for the 70-300 IS out of these two.

IMO, if you want to go for an "L" get the IS version - but then it's quite a bit more money. IS is just too good to miss on a telephoto. Of course it's your call, and the L is better built and probably a bit better IQ as well. But high-quality blurs are still rejects...

The 70-300 is only 2/3 stop slower at 200mm - and you get far more than that back with the IS. And 100mm more range to boot.

splidge

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

06/04/2007 06:38:45 PM · #15

I have both the 70-200 and the 70-300. The image quality is far superior on the L lense (go figure)but shots from the 70-300 aren't too bad. I would buy the L glass unless you think you'll be needing that extra 100mm of reach.