canon lenses 75-300 ? what is the best for the money

Discussion in 'Canon' started by BriMill9, Apr 26, 2004.

  1. BriMill9

    BriMill9 Guest

    i am looking in to buying a lens for my canon reble 2000 .i am willing to spend
    about 300. or 350 and i want a zoom lens to take pic of birds,wildlife,my
    kids,ex.i have been looking at the 75-300 or 100-300 . is it best to stay whit
    canon brand or is other brands good to .thank you for your help.
    BriMill9, Apr 26, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. BriMill9

    fox1 Guest

    The Sigma AF 4.0-5.6 70-300mm APO Macro Super is sharper and good
    fox1, Apr 26, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. BriMill9

    Bowsër Guest

    Phoenix makes the best 3rd party lenses.
    Bowsër, Apr 26, 2004
  4. BriMill9

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    The Sigma is crap and will be more costly in the long run. No Canon owner
    should ever waste money on Sigma.
    Tony Spadaro, Apr 26, 2004
  5. BriMill9

    ROBMURR Guest

    Be aware that if you get a Sigma that
    If you go to a newer camera it may need
    to be rechipped to work, if that is possible.
    Both the Canon 75-300 usm and 100-300
    usm work well.
    ROBMURR, Apr 26, 2004
  6. BriMill9

    fruitbat Guest

    I just got the 100-300/4.5-5.6 and I'm happy with it. If you've never
    used a lens with a ring-USM before, you'll absolutely love the fast
    silent autofocus and full-time manual focus (especially for wildlife).
    Canon's 75-300 lenses all lack a distance scale, and none have
    ring-USMs. I think the 100-300 has slightly better optics as well.

    fruitbat, Apr 26, 2004
  7. good value until he upgrades that Rebel body to an Elan, 3 or 10D and finds
    that Stigma lens won't work with his new body and he has to buy a proper
    Canon lens instead
    Tony Parkinson, Apr 26, 2004
  8. BriMill9

    Don Guest

    Folks, I had settled on getting the 70 - 200 L F4 when on one of the lens
    review sites they rated the 75 - 300 F4 - 5.6 series 11 USM as almost the
    same (4.1 to 4.0). Has anyone any experience with the optical difference
    between the two lenses?


    Don from Down Under
    Don, Apr 30, 2004
  9. BriMill9

    Bruce Graham Guest

    I have the 100-300 which is basically similar to the 75-300. It has low
    contrast at the long end and not much resolution. It flops out under its
    own weight and I wish I did not have it. From reviews I have read (no
    experience) I have developed a lust for the 70-200 f4L to replace it.
    Bruce Graham, Apr 30, 2004
  10. BriMill9

    fox1 Guest

    Check here
    fox1, Apr 30, 2004
  11. BriMill9

    fruitbat Guest

    The II or the III? The current lens is the III. Not sure about the II,
    although I'd guess they're optically similar, but I can tell you that
    the 70-200/4L is without a doubt vastly superior to the 75-300/4-5.6
    III. I don't know what site you got the ratings from, but every other
    report I have heard on the two lenses contradicts what you said about
    the two lenses being comparable. Of course, one doesn't have the
    200-300mm range, but I believe the 70-200 with a 1.4x TC (280mm,
    f/5.6) is still sharper than the 75-300 @ 300mm. Of course, it also
    costs a lot more. If you're on a bit of a budget, I'd get the
    100-300/4-5.6 rather than the 75-300 (the main reason being the ring
    USM). If you have the money though, go for the 70-200 and the TC...

    fruitbat, Apr 30, 2004
  12. BriMill9

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    I believe you have gotten some bad tests there.
    Tony Spadaro, Apr 30, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.