Canon 75-300mm Lens

[RobbieB]

Hello again lads.

I'm a tool.

Now that's in the open I would like people to reassure me on something. I am new to photography but lately I am going out every weekend all over the shop practicing. I have 1 lens, a 50mm bore fest. It goes nicely with my Canon 350d for what I do but the lack of zoom is driving me nuts. So I debated buying a Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Lens for it and saw they go for about £120-130. Whilst on the phone to a customer at work (serves me right) I typed Canon lens in eBay and up pops that little number, 50 seconds remaining with 12 bids at £65. I enter £70 with a rush of blood to the head as I'm a bit low on funds of late, and I win.

I know this isn't going to win me photographer of the year and it is a bit of a beginners lens, hence the price but how good is it?

[Simpo Two]

Well, you try it and if you don't like it, you sell it back on eBay and hopefully make a profit

[Scott330ci]

Hi Robbie

A lens is better than no lens in my eyes - so don't worry yourself too much.

There are a few reviews below.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-E...

http://www.photographyreview.com/mfr/canon/35mm-zo...

http://photo.net/equipment/canon/75-300IS/

For the price I wouldnt complain. I own a tamron 70-300mm also priced around the £140 mark and whilst I won't win any sharpness awards with it, for me it is fine, nothing a bit of photoshop wont sort.

Have fun with your new lens

[Busa_Rush]

If you are new to photography then it's not going to hamper you, have a go and once you think it's holding you back, swap it.

[RobbieB]

Yeah I'm not in panic just yet, I can always sell. To be honest none of my images are particularly sharp, but I doubt I can ever get anything amazing with the 350d to start with can I?

I'll have a flick through the reviews now. I was just wondering if anyone had it and liked/disliked it.

[Simpo Two]

Busa_Rush said:

If you are new to photography then it's not going to hamper you, have a go and once you think it's holding you back, swap it.

Good summary.

For many years I was perfectly happy with a Nikon 70-300ED, but then as I got fussier I saw it was soft at the long end and had CA - so upgraded to the VR version which seems to address those issues. So if you are happy with the results from a £70 lens enjoy it while it lasts!!

[Glosphil]

I use a Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III on my 400D, mainly for photos at airshows. A friend bought it in the States for me at £80 . I had asked for the USM version (it was only £8 more) but he bought the wrong version. I have used it mainly in the 200-300mm range and, remembering what I paid for it, the results are OK.

[Mr E]

I shoot with a Sigma 70-300 APO that was something like 135 quid. As with other lenses of this ilk, great bang for buck but soft on high zoom.

If it's rubbish, it's not cost you much.

[Busa_Rush]

RobbieB said:

but I doubt I can ever get anything amazing with the 350d to start with can I?

Have a look on flickr for 350d . . . there are some brilliant shots on there I have the 450d and some cheap lenses and I'm getting better results already than I did years ago with film and similarly "cheap" camera and lenses. It's not necessarily the equipment but the composition, exposure and a little bit of processing

[Gemm]

If you are thinking of buying 75-300, it's not known as one of Canon best budget lens. I always recommend (but always get ignored!) 100-300mm instead. Its specs are far better than 75-300. Full-time manual focus alone is definitely worth it.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Canon-EF-100-300mm-f-4-5-5-6...

Edited to add.... I have no idea if the lens in the ad above is good or not, but it was just to show the model.

Edited by Gemm on Tuesday 6th April 16:58

[RobDickinson]

I had a mk1 one a while ago. In good light and when it hits focus it can produce a decent image stopped down a bit.

Focus is realy slow & wide open it was poor (compared to others...)

But for 70 quid you cant go too wrong.

[MonkeyHanger]

Gemm said:

If you are thinking of buying 75-300, it's not known as one of Canon best budget lens. I always recommend (but always get ignored!) 100-300mm instead. Its specs are far better than 75-300. Full-time manual focus alone is definitely worth it.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Canon-EF-100-300mm-f-4-5-5-6...

Edited to add.... I have no idea if the lens in the ad above is good or not, but it was just to show the model.

100-300 every time, but make sure it's the USM version.

[Rob13]

I'm in for a zoom at the moment to take to the superbikes on my 40d. I've considered the Canon usm 70-300 for 290 quid or the sigma 100-300 f4 which is more like 500 quid.

[MonkeyHanger]

Rob13 said:

I'm in for a zoom at the moment to take to the superbikes on my 40d. I've considered the Canon usm 70-300 for 290 quid or the sigma 100-300 f4 which is more like 500 quid.

If you can get a Sigma 100-300 F4 for £500 you should be snapping someone's hand off. That's an £800 lens at best current UK price and more than worth it.

[Rob13]

MonkeyHanger said:

Rob13 said:

I'm in for a zoom at the moment to take to the superbikes on my 40d. I've considered the Canon usm 70-300 for 290 quid or the sigma 100-300 f4 which is more like 500 quid.

If you can get a Sigma 100-300 F4 for £500 you should be snapping someone's hand off. That's an £800 lens at best current UK price and more than worth it.

That's a used price, I missed one on ebay last night at 450 quid which was hardly used. Will be keeping a close eye on it

[DiscoColin]

I have the 75-300 III in question. I got mine for even less from a mate and it isn't bad value. However - it is soft wide open and IMHO is at its best stopped all the way down to F8 (which works agreeably enough for airshows and the like).

I have some shots from it that I am very happy with and for what you have paid I think that it is a reasonable buy. There is certainly better glass out there, but not much that will argue with that money.

[Dogsey]

Rob13 said:

MonkeyHanger said:

Rob13 said:

I'm in for a zoom at the moment to take to the superbikes on my 40d. I've considered the Canon usm 70-300 for 290 quid or the sigma 100-300 f4 which is more like 500 quid.

If you can get a Sigma 100-300 F4 for £500 you should be snapping someone's hand off. That's an £800 lens at best current UK price and more than worth it.

That's a used price, I missed one on ebay last night at 450 quid which was hardly used. Will be keeping a close eye on it

I love my Sigma 100-300 f4, used it on my 40D at a rallycross meet on Monday and it performed perfectly, photos are here.

[Rob13]

Well just done a deal with a 70-300mm IS USM for £290 delivered with hood & UV filter. Seems a good buy and if I want to upgrade next year (It'll be my first DSLR telephoto for motorsport), then I'm sure I wont lose much if anything on it.

[Gemm]

MonkeyHanger said:

100-300 every time, but make sure it's the USM version.

Yes, definitely, the one with a little window on the barrel that tells you the focusing distance (what is it actually called??) It's ring USM, so AF is faster and quieter.

[RobDickinson]

These were taken with mine:
http://picasaweb.google.com/rob.dickinson/ScabsSur...

http://picasaweb.google.com/rob.dickinson/Zoo#