Is a Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM worth the price?

Discussion in 'Canon' started by here, Jun 18, 2007.

  1. here

    here Guest

    Costco is selling this lens for $199. Would you buy it?

    Thanks
    Dano
     
    here, Jun 18, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. here

    Pete D Guest

    For $199 you will get a $199 lens, no more, no less. If that is all you can
    afford then go for it, I would probably hold out for a better lens.

    I assume it is not the IS lens, if it is it is probably a bargain but there
    is still better for a little more.

    Cheers.

    Pete
     
    Pete D, Jun 18, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. here

    Tom Ross Guest


    Nope. I have one (a gift from a friend who had good intentions), and
    about the only thing positive I can say about it is it's light, it's
    cheap, and the focal length is nice.

    But it is SLOOOOW, focusing leaves a lot to be desired, and the image
    quality is poor. Image quality gets better if you stop down, but
    you'll need to use a tripod when it's extended to 300mm.


    Before you give your money to Costco I suggest you check eBay - I'm
    sure there is someone out there trying to unload one. And start saving
    for an EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM.

    TR
     
    Tom Ross, Jun 18, 2007
    #3
  4. here

    B. Dover Guest

    B/H is listing this lens at $159.99 and it is well worth the money. It
    is not as sharp wide open as a more expensive canon lens that costs
    two or three times as much but unsharp mask can level the playing
    field surprisingly well.

    Ben
     
    B. Dover, Jun 18, 2007
    #4
  5. Hello Dano.

    Over her in the UK the reviews tend to suggest buying the 90-300mm lens
    rather than the 75-300. They usually reckon it is optically better than the
    75-300 lens.

    Regards, Ian.
     
    Fred Anonymous, Jun 18, 2007
    #5
  6. here

    Celcius Guest


    Hi!
    I bought the EF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 IS USM for my Canon 350D which I swapped
    for a 30D now.
    That lens is perhaps not as great as an L glass, but is well worth it.
    Marcel
     
    Celcius, Jun 18, 2007
    #6
  7. here

    Bill Funk Guest

    Before I read your response here, I looked up the 70-300mm IS lens,
    and it's $550 (imported (gray market) is $20 less), but both are out
    of stock.
    Does anyone know if this lens is being replaced? It's relatively new.

    --
    THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

    United Nations chief nuclear weapons inspector
    Mohamed ElBaradei tried to cool tensions between
    the U.S. and Iran Thursday. He said it would be
    an act of sheer madness to attack Iran over its
    refusal to freeze their nuclear program.
    So it's a go.
     
    Bill Funk, Jun 18, 2007
    #7
  8. here

    John Sheehy Guest

    Sharpening soft optics beyond what it takes to reverse the effect of the
    anti-aliasing filter does not give great results, and can intensify noise
    quite a bit.

    There's nothing like a sharp lens to begin with, to cut through the noise.


    --
     
    John Sheehy, Jun 18, 2007
    #8
  9. Sure, if you don't mind paying 33% more than market rate and you aren't
    planning
    on shooting anything faster than a sunbathing
    http://www.pbase.com/slack/image/41136212

    Otherwise...
     
    â–€Slack, Jun 20, 2007
    #9
    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.