For a while I have wanted to complete my camera lens collection. I had the 10-135mm range covered beautifully by my
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM primary lens, and
Tokina 10-17mm f3.5-4.5 AT-X 107 AF DX ultra-wide angle fisheye lens. All I needed was a telephoto. Before purchasing my
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM lens, I used a Canon EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 III base lens (non-USM). I was rather disappointed, and knew that I needed Image Stabilization for such a long focal length, especially since I do not own a tripod. I looked around, and even went as far as to consider L glass, but decided on the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM since it seemed to have everything that I was looking for.
-WARNING- *When looking at telephoto lenses, I started on in the cheaper range with lenses going for just over $100. I noticed that many different lenses were either 70-300mm or 75-300mm with their focal length range. This ultimately became very confusing, and did not actually know that Canon made a non-Diffractive Optics 70-300mm telephoto. Therefore, I came very close to purchasing the Canon EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM lens. I was then told that the older Canon EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM lens is actually considerably worse in quality than the newer
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM which the review is about. The wideness of this lens is not the only difference. While I have never used the image stabilized 75-300mm variant, there are many people that are very disappointed with that that lens. It is supposed to have the same optical quality as the cheaper non-IS variants. Thus, people complained of having soft looking photos. The 75-300mm goes for around $400 or so on eBay. Just so you are aware, the 75-300mm and 70-300mm are very
different lenses. The
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM is supposed to have considerably improved optics as well as improved image stabilization since it offers a two-setting variant. So please do not confuse the two lenses, or you may be disappointed in the quality with the older version. While I have not used nor seen the 75-300mm variant, I have used the MkIII non-IS lens, and was not very happy with it.
Also, I wanted to point out that there is yet another variant of the 70-300mm telephoto lens. This is the considerably more expensive
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 DO IS USM. The "DO" stands for Diffractive Optics. This results in a much smaller lens, and is supposedly supposed to have sharper looking images. I have never used the lens so I can not comment. The MSRP is as high as L-Series glass, however you can pick the lens used for $800 or less with no problems. This is still quite a bit more expensive than the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM. While you may have a much smaller lens, is it worth the extra money? You should also take this into consideration.
Please be aware of these confusing details, and good luck!
-PRICE- *Brand new, the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM runs around the mid-$500's on online retailers. I do not want to know how much this baby costs at a brick & mortar store. Before I go further into price, I would like to comment a little bit on the market for telephoto lenses.
Based on my experiences of searching for the perfect telephoto, I noticed something interesting about this market segment. Interestingly, a telephoto lens is either very cheap, or very expensive. There is not too much middle ground here. Therefore, you can pick up a Tamron or lowest-end Canon 7#-300mm (I used the Canon) for close to the $100-mark. Then if you want excellent quality telephotos that are a bit more practical (Image Stabilization), you will be paying almost $1,000 or more when it comes to buying either the very neat Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 DO IS USM or the Canon EF 100-400mm f4-5.6L IS USM lens (My future telephoto). There is very little in the middle-ground, but the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM as well as the highly-acclaimed Canon 70-200mm f4L USM lens hit the mark in the ~$500 range. I actually looked very seriously at both lenses.
I purchased it at Adorama refurbished for $464.95 $9.00 shipping. This was considerably cheaper than eBay, and was refurbished by Canon. This was a great deal!
But when it really comes down to it, you have to think about which lens is more practical? For example, the Canon 70-200mm f4L USM lens seemed like a great idea since it is L-Glass with the neat off-white color that is bound to gain attention. The optical quality is also pristine. However, the lens made very little sense for me since my primary lens already reaches out to 135mm, and the extra 65mm doesn't seem to be worth it. I could get extra reach by using a Tamron SP 1.4x teleconverter, but this would also set me back $130 . Also, there could be a depreciation in optical quality as well as making the lens ultimately slower. Therefore, the L-Series did not seem practical at the moment. If you have a 17-85mm as your primary lens and do not need the reach up to 300mm, or are willing to pay extra for a good 1.4x teleconverter to boost you to 280mm, then it maybe worth it.
Otherwise, the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM seems like a more sound investment. Yes, it is not an L-Series lens, but it has two things that the 70-200mm does not have. First it has Image Stabilization, which is very important when you are taking longer shots. Secondly, without a teleconverter, you will already have the extra reach up to 300mm. If you were to use a 1.4x teleconverter, you would only have a maximum zoom up to 280mm, still giving a 20mm advantage to the non-L.
In terms of the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM stacked up against the cheaper telephotos, I believe that the Image Stabilization is the biggest difference. In my opinion, this makes it worth it. If you are planning to use a telephoto lens without a tripod, then you will most likely benefit from Image Stabilization. It might just be worth the extra money for this feature, to ensure yourself clear images with no blurriness. Also, the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM does have improved optics.
In terms of more expensive lenses, I feel that the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM is quite a bit more practical than the DO variant. It is quite a bit cheaper. While the whole concept of DO is very fascinating, most people would most likely understand that purchasing a telephoto means having a larger lens. Therefore, unless you are obsessed with the idea of having a compact telephoto, I would prefer this lens over the DO.
Ultimately, the price point is quite good for what you are getting. You are getting a high quality Canon lens with good optical quality and Image Stabilization which is a life-saver for longer shots. It is not an L-Series lens (Though I would seriously consider the 70-200mm f4L USM), but it still offers great practicality for the semi-professional photographer.
-BUILD QUALITY- *When I researched this lens, many people complained about the overall build quality. I feel that the lens is a bit more solid than the cheaper 75-300mm variants. I believe that the barrel is made of metal, since it feels extremely solid and the lens was very cold when it was first shipped to my door. Anyhow, I have absolutely no complaints with the build quality. The lens is heavier and feels very solid. It feels more solid than the cheaper lenses I have used. Of course it is not the L-Series, and you can have the 70-200mm for just about the same price, but you will be losing crucial features such as IS and the extra 100mm reach. I must say, if you take care of the lens, it will last you a long time. There are no complaints here.
-FEATURES- *The big difference between the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM and the ~$100 telephoto lenses is the Image Stabilization. It features a more advanced system than that of the previous 75-300mm lens. It has two IS modes. I almost always keep it in the first one. This is for just general photos where you are zooming out long, and do not want blur from hand shake. There is also the second mode, which is meant for panning over a moving object. I have yet to use this.
The
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM is also a USM lens. USM is Canon's Ultrasonic Motor which provides lightning fast focusing speed. I was very excited about this ever since I experienced the ring USM on my now gone 28-105mm lens. To my disappointment, the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM is not exactly the quickest lens when it comes to focusing. While it is quite a bit faster than a non-USM telephoto, it is not lightning quick like my 28-135mm or other similar lenses. The front element also rotates when focusing, which is not good when using a polarized filter. I use a Hoya 58mm UV filter, thus it does not bother me. Overall, while I wish the focusing on the lens was faster, the focus speed is still satisfactory for the images that I take.
-IMAGE QUALITY- *There is a noticeable improvement in the image quality from the bottom-end 75-300mm to the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM. When I first took photographs with the lens, I was quite impressed with the quality. I took pictures in the less than 100mm range, and found the image quality to be superb. The images were very well saturated and vivid with colors. There was no apparent softness, and it was quite an improvement over the 75-300mm. I do not know how this stacks up to the L-Series as of yet, but for amateurs like me, the quality is better than expected.
You can of course use this as a portrait lens. There are people that prefer to use telephoto lenses for portrait shots since they help capture more facial details. Though, my
"Nifty Fifty" is still the ideal lens for that purpose due to the very large aperture. It was an improvement over the cheaper 75-300mm, especially when going longer. Over 200mm or so, the 75-300mm lens would get soft. The
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM still remained very sharp. I recently visited the Empire State building on vacation and used the lens from the observatory. I was extremely satisfied with the images. I also used Image Stabilization (Setting "1") when taking images, and did not have any blurry photos. Thus, the Image Stabilization is a godsend for those who take images without a tripod. I do not own a tripod, and am not planning on purchasing one either for a while. Thus, it helps my images look sharp, even when my hands may shake somewhat. The Image Stabilization helps correct shake down to three f-stops. My images look sharper stopped down, and this is yet another benefit of having IS on the lens.
So far, the Image Stabilization in the "1" setting has been excellent for taking photos of stationary objects or people. However, if I decide to take action photos at sporting events, birds, vehicles, or anything moving, I would switch to the "2" setting. I have not yet had such experiences, but will hopefully get to take images of moving objects soon.
I have not yet purchased a lens hood for the lens. Many people purchase them to help prevent against lens flare. I have not noticed lens flare in my photos so far, but I will most likely purchase a lens hood soon.
In terms of softness, the lens so far has proved to be very sharp. I noticed softness, especially around the edges, when using the much cheaper Canon EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 lens. This was not the case with this lens.
In terms of speed, this is a slower lens with a smaller aperture. Unless you are going to spend close to $1,000 or more, you will not be getting a larger aperture. Therefore, the f-stop on this lens ranges from f4-5.6. Therefore, the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM works ideally in well-lighted environments. Even if you are using a Canon Speedlite flash, going over 105mm or so will already be too far for the flash to have any effect. If you are concerned about taking photos in lower light environments, I would recommend looking into a third party lens with a larger aperture offering an f-stop of f2.8. This will suit your needs, but will have a high price tag. Also, if you want a larger aperture lens from Canon, you can go for the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L USM, which will cost you close to $1,000. Nonetheless, for most of my photos, the lens has been quick enough. I do not typically shoot in darker environments with this lens. Therefore, in this price range, and especially considering what you are getting, I would not expect a faster lens.
I wonder how the images would compare to a Canon 70-200mm f4L USM combined with the Tamron SP 1.4x teleconverter. Still, I appreciate the fact that the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM still gives an extra 20mm of reach. Also, I can guarantee that most images will be sharp thanks to IS.
Overall, the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM should give excellent image quality for most semi-professionals, and even more. If you are looking for something a bit sharper, I would recommend going up to true professional lenses, such as the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM or the Canon EF 100-400 f4-5.6L IS USM lenses. But for your everyday amateur photographer that wants something a bit better, the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM should provide superb image quality.
-CONCLUSION- *The
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM is a beautiful lens for not being an L-Series piece of glass. When you look at what it has to offer, it really is the most practical telephoto lens that you can buy for your Canon SLR. It has Image Stabilization which is vital for taking longer shots without a tripod. Also, the optical quality on the lens is very good and delivers excellent quality images. The price also is right, with ~$500 making it extremely affordable. I believe that if you really care about the quality of photos, it is worth buying the lens since you won't have to worry about your cherished memories coming out blurry, which is the case when shooting so far without a tripod.
The Canon EF 70-200mm f4L USM is very tempting since it is in about roughly the same price range. But as I have stated above, it does not seem as practical. But of course, it is a very fine piece of glass, and I would whole-heartedly recommend it if it makes you happy.
Though for the semi-professional shooter that wants a telephoto that packs so much for such a reasonable price, I believe that the
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM is an excellent choice. While I do wish that it would focus faster, the images coming out as good as they do makes up for it. The
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM is a real winner, especially at this price.
**CHECK OUT EOS-MOUNT LENSES** -Zoom Lenses- Canon EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM LensCanon EF 24-70mm F2.8L USM Lens Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Lens Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM Lens Tamron SP AF17-50mm f/2.8 Di-II LD Lens -Telephoto Lenses- Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM Lens Canon EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 III Lens -Prime Lenses- Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II Lens -Ultra-Wide/Fisheye Lenses- Tokina 10-17mm f3.5-4.5 AT-X 107 AF DX -External Flashes- Canon Speedlite 580EX II Flash Canon Speedlite 430EX Flash Metz Mecablitz 58 AF-1 Flash -Other Accessories- Canon Extender EF 2x II Canon Gadget Bag 100DG
