Customer Reviews


130 Reviews
5 star:
 (110)
4 star:
 (13)
3 star:
 (3)
2 star:
 (2)
1 star:
 (2)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favorable review
The most helpful critical review


212 of 219 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Lightweight and good performance
I've been shooting for about 4yrs now and while I'm definitely not a super seasoned professional, I can say that I have ample experience to offer some good insight about the equipment. I've had a 40D, 50D and am now shooting primarily with a full frame 5D Mark II.

One of my favorite lens is the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM lens. I haven't had the need or urge...
Published on January 17, 2011 by D. Zhou

versus
50 of 70 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Disappointing L lens, Not Worth the Wait
This lens is not what I had hoped for. It's a good lens, don't get me wrong, but really, REALLY?
You can't use a Canon Tx on these! You have to use a third party tele extender on a $1500 lens. Then
add the fact that the Tripod collar on this 2.3 pound lens is OPTIONAL, but for another $190.00 you
can buy an OEM Canon.

I shoot wildlife and...
Published on September 12, 2011 by Lynn May


‹ Previous | 1 213 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

212 of 219 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Lightweight and good performance, January 17, 2011
By 
D. Zhou (Los Angeles, CA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras (Electronics)
I've been shooting for about 4yrs now and while I'm definitely not a super seasoned professional, I can say that I have ample experience to offer some good insight about the equipment. I've had a 40D, 50D and am now shooting primarily with a full frame 5D Mark II.

One of my favorite lens is the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM lens. I haven't had the need or urge to upgrade to the Mark II version of this lens yet, but I have been waiting for Canon release an L zoom lens that fills the gap my 70-200 and 100-400 so that I don't have to carry both... Anyone of these lens is already heavy enough, so to have to carry both is quite a duty in itself.

Pros:
- Prior to this lens, my lens of choice for outdoor photography is my 70-200 f/2.8 lens, but the light weight, size and focal length makes me think twice before I leave the house when I only want to take one lens. If I know my destination has good lighting, I quite often take this lens over my fixed aperture lens. The added 100mm is a great add benefit within a zoom lens.

- Overall build quality is superb, as to be expected of all L-series lenses.

- Very sharp lens through almost the entire focal length. When compared to the 70-200, I do notice this lens to be a little softer wide open. Zoomed in say, past 100 or 120, the sharpness is on par w/ the 70-200.

- Shorter barrel length makes it easy to carry within a toploader case. I was happy to see that I didn't have to buy a new case just for this lens. Again, in reference to the 70-200, I was able to re-use the toploader I used w/ that lens.

- While I still try to limit my equipment in terms of exposure to rain & water, this lens is weather sealed compared to the non-L 70-300 lens. Its added comfort in case you HAVE to shoot in the wet or if you unexpectedly get caught in the rain.

- I MUCH PREFER this lens' twist zoom (very smooth) over the shotgun style push/pull action of the 100-400 L lens. The zoom ring is smoooth and extends/retracts effortlessly, a welcome quality for a lens of this focal length and size.

- Focus ring is also super smooth with little resistance as with most L series lens.

Cons:
- I was a little disappointed to see that Canon did not include a tripod mounting ring. I understand that tripod mounts on a lens is most critical for heavy/large lens, but this is no small lens by any means and it definitely teeters on the edge of being a heavy lens. I would highly recommend getting the tripod mount for this lens so you don't stress the mount on your camera.

- This lens is not compatible with any of Canon's lens extenders. It would have been great to convert this 70-300 to a 98-420, but as it turns out, the rear element is very shallow in relations to the mounting treads. This is where the shorter barrel is a negative for this lens.

Neutral/Overall thoughts:
I would have much much preferred to have the zoom ring as the inner ring in place of where the focus ring currently is. I would have to say though, having the zoom ring on the outside/end of the lens does offer a little better balance for the lens when you zoom out (barrel extends when you zoom).

I would say, if you already have a 70-200mm L f/2.8 lens, I would heavily recommend the consideration of a 1.4x extender over the purchase of this lens. Not only do you get the benefit of getting a fixed f/4.0 zoom lens after the extender, but you can save yourself the cost of buying another lens. The caveat to this tradeoff is that, w/ a f/2.8 + 1.4x extender, the weight is significantly greater than the 70-300 lens by itself. I haven't necessarily weighed it on a scale, but, the 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x extender feels about twice as heavy as the 70-300.

Using Canon provided specs, here are the weight comparisons:
70-300 f/4-5.6L IS:.......................... 2.31 lbs
70-200 f/2.8L IS:............................. 3.24 lbs
70-200 f/2.8L IS + 1.4x extender:...... 3.74 lbs

Overall, I have decided on keeping this lens mainly because of the versatility and the incredibly light weight and size. I can't wait for Canon to refine the well aged 100-400 L lens... I hope it happens soon...
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


154 of 158 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars The 70-300L is a winner, February 3, 2011
By 
Thomas E. Judd "TomJ" (North Texas, United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras (Electronics)
As a working professional photographer I bought this lens with some hesitation as I already own Canon 70-200L f/4 (non IS) and 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 lenses which cover much of the same range and have proven to both be fine lenses in their own right. I discovered over the past year or so that my 100-400 lens while quite satisfying on my full frame bodies, struggles a bit on my 7D body which is where I now use it the most for wildlife and bird photography. So when the new 70-300 lens was announced it piqued my interest. Certainly it does not have the reach that a 400 mm lens has and for small birds, 400 is often not even enough. Yet the reviews and anecdotes kept filtering in about the quality and sharpness of this new lens and so I decided I'd give it a try myself all the while knowing that I could probably re-sell it easily enough if it was not for me.

Well, upon receiving the lens, I must admit I was nearly won over before I had even mounted the thing on a camera. It's simply a gorgeous piece of engineering. The size and heft are substantial without being too much. The zoom and focus rings work with a wonderful smoothness and precision. The latest generation IS does an amazing job allowing hand held shots at 300 mm to be accomplished at very slow shutter speeds while retaining sharpness as long as your subject itself is stationary. I have found that it makes an excellent portrait lens...something I did not originally purchase it for. The focus seems much more sure and precise than my 100-400 does on my 7D body. The size and balance is ideal on the 7D with a battery grip. I have yet to use it on either of my 1D series bodies, but I am quite certain it will feel great on them as well.

Optically the lens is very similar to my 70-200 mm f/4L...which is to say it does not get much better than this! There is a certain look...a crispness of detail and clarity that causes the images to just have that something special. I can shoot wide open and know that the shots will be sharp. With a bit of planning, you can get nicely defocused backgrounds in portraits. For photographing birds, if you are able to get reasonably close (shooting from a blind, car, etc.) the lens has decent reach and if you are using a high megapixel "crop-sensor" camera you can usually get even closer with post-processing cropping.

So is this lens for you? That I cannot say. I think it will appeal to lots of professional and amateur shooters, however, and if it meets your needs for range and type of shooting I doubt many will find much fault with it. As the owner of six Canon "L" lenses, I have to say that this new 70-300 may quickly become my overall favorite!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


94 of 99 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars sell your kidney and buy this lens..., March 20, 2011
This review is from: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras (Electronics)
i rarely write reviews, but since this is a fairly new product, i felt compelled to help my fellow photographers, as they have helped me in the past with my purchasing decisions.

after reading many reviews on this lens i decided to take the plunge. even with its recent "discount", it is still a rather serious investment for all of us who are not professional photographers. i have recently gotten back into photography and i've built my canon bag from the ground up. i chose canon over the competitors because i was looking for the best quality, with the best selection at the best price. i personally consider canon "l" lenses to be a great value, for they will hopefully provide a lifetime of enjoyment and memories. that being said, buy this lens. do not pass go or collect $200. buy it, i don't think you'll be disappointed.

first of all, this could be the best canon l lens that i own....period. i know that it's only been out a short time, but in this case i believe that the new technology is far superior to the old (ever lugged around the 100-400 f4 is for a few hours? and yes, i am the guy that truly hates the push/pull system) the same cannot be said about the new 1.4 or 2.0 extenders. $500 a piece, really? i am very satisfied with the old ones, since i paid about $500...for both of them! and so, i digress...

this lens is incredibly sharp throughout the entire range. i have done my own amateur tests on a variety of subjects and i find it to be one of the few "complete" lenses out there. i also own the 70-200 l f4 is and it is definitely on par in quality and having the extra 100mm on the long end makes a huge difference. btw, i am a spontaneous street photographer from nyc. i want to carry as little as possible and want to be able to catch a shot in a moments notice. even at f4 with the is, i am able to get the shots that i want 95% of the time. i have shot in all types of light during the day and even shot the super moon (tonight 3-19-11) and i am now realizing the true beauty of this lens. yes, i could go for all the 2.8 zooms, but then again, i only have one kidney to sacrifice, right?!

so why buy this lens when i already own the 70-200 ? well, it's not a necessity, but rather an attractive option. if you are comfortable with the 70/200 f whatever and have a few extenders, then you are already in business. what i dislike most about the 70-200 (and the 100-400 for that matter) is that it is somewhat cumbersome to carry. it always looks and feels goofy if you are carrying it freestyle through the city. with the extenders, i might as well be carrying an 800 mm f 5.6 l, because it it feels odd on my side or in any bag that i carry it in. it feels weird, long and thin and not really part of the body or an extension of me. the 70-300 is just the opposite. it is built like a tank (a small and more practical one). it feels great in my hands and the balance/weight ratio feels very natural to me. on the body it feels like many of the larger 77mm l lenses, but it actually takes 67mm filters. so just swap the uv and the polarizers from the 70-200 f4 and save a few $$$.

the major con for most is that yes, the zoom and the focus rings could be reversed. yes, i'm sure you've heard this before, but here is when it counts. if you're in a moving vehicle, the bean bag is your best friend. if you try to lean this on the bean bag, then this will impair you from using the zoom. why would canon do this? because when your going freestyle (like me 95% of the time) it will feel like money in your hands. with your hand further down and under the barrel it feels more natural, more stable and more comfortable; especially if you are out for a few hours.

con #2, no freakin' tripod ring?! yes, you will be going freestyle most of the time, but for $1500, we all deserve a tripod ring and a kiss on the cheek, right?! c'mon canon, pony up and make it right...

con #3, canon 1.4 and 2.0 extender WILL NOT WORK ON THIS LENS. do not be fooled by what you hear. if you want to add range, consider the kenko pro 300 extenders. they are made with hoya glass and should do the trick. yes, it is an additional cost, but hopefully this will not dissuade you from making this purchase.

summary:

taking all that i have written into consideration, i do not think that you will be disappointed with this lens. i think it is a fine addition any bag and i think those who are considering a 70-200 f whatever should definitely consider this lens too. i am not a pro by any means, but just a guy who thought it was time to lend a hand to others who have helped me a long the way. always remember to be good to one another and to let the other guy get the shot too. take care, be well and capture the moments with those that you love.

fye, after many months of research and careful consideration, the following is what i currently have in my bag. again, i built it from the ground up by considering the best quality at the best value. i hope it will somehow assist you with your future purchases:

bodies: rebel xti and rebel t2i, both with battery grips (saving up for the 7d, now)

lens zoom: canon 18-135mm (versatile travel lens that came with the t2i kit) tokina 11-16mm 2.8, canon 17-40mm f4 l, canon 24-105mm f4 l is (my primary lens), canon 70-200mm f4 l is, canon 70-300 mm f4 l is (obviously)

extenders: canon 1.4 and 2.0 (generation 2), kenko pro 300x 2.0 (just for the new 70-300)

prime: canon 28mm 1.8, canon 50 mm 1.4 and 1.8, canon 60mm 2.8 (macro), canon 85mm 1.8 (all for low light, since my zooms are mostly f4 and higher)

fyi, i only use hoya hd filters on all of my lenses. why? just ask someone who has ever dropped an l lens. i believe that they are the best value in terms of "l" lens quality, durability and value. furthermore, they don't leave fingerprints. how cool is that?

if you know of better options or have any suggestions, please let me know. any help or advice is always welcome and greatly appreciated. danke schon!

cheers, m
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


76 of 82 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Superb lens for photographing wildlife, December 20, 2010
By 
JRO (Santa Fe, NM USA) - See all my reviews
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras (Electronics)
I used this lens last week on my T2i to photograph Sandhill cranes at the Bosque del Apache wildlife refuge in New Mexico. I captured more sharp in-focus hand held shots than I was ever able to get using the 300f/4L and 100-400L lenses. The 70-300 zoom range gives me much more flexibility when shooting fast moving wildlife than the 300L and its 4 stop image stabilization and focusing speed are far superior to the 100-400. Image quality is similar to the 300L and superior to the 100-400L (at least with my copy). Overall, image quality is similar to the excellent 70-200f/4L IS, but the 70-300 is more compact with a longer reach. I think that when it comes to wildlife photography, this lens is especially well suited for a crop sensor camera where it provides a very useful 112-480mm range. I see no negatives with this superb lens except it's a little pricey - but that should change over the next few months. But for now, this lens is providing me with the best quality wildlife photos I've ever taken - and that is worth a lot! A real winner!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


26 of 28 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Everything and more, January 7, 2011
This review is from: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras (Electronics)
All the reviews online have stated the great quality of the optics on this lens. I finally decided to take a chance, I'm glad I did. I had actually purchased the Canon 100-400 L lens and returned it after less the stellar results. This new lens is easy to use, I can track birds better than any other lens I've tried. I also rented the Canon 400L prime lens,and the crop of pictures with this new lens equal if not surpass the prime. I also noticed I'm getting much faster shutter speeds at 300mm at f/5.6 (1/2000-1/3000) than I ever got with the two previously mentioned lenses under the same conditions, I frequent the same area at the same time of day chasing down Hawk pictures, this may have to do with focal length but it sure makes my pictures much sharper. I can actually zoom 100% of pictures taken with this lens and still have great quality, this alone makes it a keeper. It does cost alot and it is a shame no tripod collar is included (I found a knock off for $25), but other then that it's well worth every penney. From my expericne at airshows this is going to be a standout lens for that, as I find 300mm on a crop body more than enough reach. The image stabalization has also allowed me to use this indoors at shutter speeds as low as 1/15 with great results. An all around fantastic lens, well worth the price.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


23 of 25 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Quite a fine lens., August 19, 2011
By 
anon (Durham, NC) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras (Electronics)
Just tried and it is quite a fine lens. One of the better zooms made. I think it is good enough to replace the 70-200 f/4 IS for those who would like a bit more reach without bothering with a TC but still care a great deal about the image quality from 70-200mm (if all you really care about is 70-200mm then I would just stick with the 70-200mm since it is sharper over a larger portion of the range, lighter, costs less, constant f/4). This is the first and only lens that I think you can say that about. The others either give away too much image quality (Tamron 70-300 VC and even moreso all the old Canon 75-300/100-300/Simga 70-300/etc.) or too much image quality and moreso AF precision and speed (Canon 70-300 IS non-L) or are too large and bulky to really be comparable (for instance the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II + TC).

-----------------
I compared it to the Tamron 70-300 VC and it was better wide open over the entire focal range, often much better. Stopped well down it was always at least as sharp and, as often as not, sharper. It did not suffer from any halation when shooting bright objects under glaring sun as the Tamron did. It has less logitudinal CA (i.e. less purple fringing). The AF is somewhat more precise and I'd say at least 50% faster. It costs tons more, so it is arguably a worse value than the Tamron, but it does deliver more (same can not be said about the 17-40L vs. the Tamron 17-50 2.8 where, IMO, the latter is not only less expensive, but outright better). It is also heavier than the Tamron, a little down side.

----------------
I also compared it to the fabled Canon 70-200 f/4 IS.

At the center of the frame wide open:
70-300L was noticeably sharper at 70mm, although with more CA
just slightly less sharp at 100mm
noticeably less sharp at 135mm
slightly less sharp at 165mm
slightly sharper at 200mm and with less CA
quite noticeably sharper at 280mm than the other lens with 1.4x TC III and with less CA
(stopped down results usually became close, although the 70-200 still did a little bit better mid-range)

At the mid-frame and edges:
it varied but things were often close although sometimes one was sharper than the other at certain focal lengths and apertures

It appeared to focus about the same speed as the 70-200 f/4 IS and at least as precisely.

The manual focusing ring was smoother on the 70-300L.

For some dumb reason Canon did leave the focusing limiter switch off of the 70-300L though.

Didn't compare the IS much but it's probably the same.

The 70-300L does weigh a bit more, getting to be a little bulkier than you'd like for small, lightweight tele-zoom, but it just barely qualifies I'd say.

It sure is nice to get 200-300mm without messing with swapping a TC on and off all the time. A major plus and for some perhaps enough to give the constant f/4 from 70-200mm.

----------------------

PROS:
very good contrast, color and sharpness (better than the fabled 70-200 f/4 IS at the edges of the range of that lens, although not quite as good in the middle range at center frame (close mid-frame and edges), better above 200mm than the other with 1.4x TC)

not as large or heavy as the 70-200 2.8s or 100-300 f/4 or 300 4s or especially 2.8s primes

fast and precise AF

IS

200-300mm range built-in

less CA on the long end than the 70-200s

smoother manual focusing ring than the 70-200 f/4 lenses

best compact 70/100-300 type lens ever made
-------
CONS:
a bit pricey and super pricey considering Canon was so utterly stingy as to not include the tripod collar, a true disgrace (and one wonders what it would've done had they not left out a fluorite element which they gave to all the other L lenses in its class, that seemed a little cheap too)

a little on the bulky side for this sort of lens

no constant f/4 from 70-200 like the 70-200 f/4 lenses (although it does manage a 4.5 up to nearly 160mm so that is not toooo bad, variable aperture still makes M mode for action a little tricky though)

no focusing limiter

noticeably more CA on the long end than the 70-200s

not quite as sharp middle of the 70-200 range, center frame, as the 70-200s

--------
I mostly gave it a 4 instead of 5 for the price and yet not even including tripod collar.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


12 of 12 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Surpasses the 200 2.8, September 28, 2012
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras (Electronics)
I purchased this lens after having tried the 1.4x TC on my Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Telephoto Lens for Canon SLR Cameras and not being satisfied with the reach. The promise of IS as well as the ability to compose with the zoom and the positive reviews were the final lures.
I brought it home today and set up my tripod and took a photograph of a doorknob at the other end of a hall at 200mm, using my 5DM2. I did the same with my 200 2.8. Center point focus, exactly in the center of the shiny doorknob, both at F 5.6, 1/5sec, Large .JPG output. I opened them both up in Photoshop and viewed them at 100%, then again at 200%. I was so blown away at the difference I did the same thing again, and saw the same differences again: the 70-300 IQ clearly surpasses the 200. The grains of wood in the door clearly pop out from the 70-300 lens where they are obviously softer from the 200. The myriad of reflections in the brass doorknob, twisting this way and that, are much cleaner and well defined from the new lens.

I was so surprised by this that I decided to immediately log in to Amazon and report the difference. I don't think I'm allowed to post links to web pages or else I would show my results. Suffice it to say I'm very surprised. I thought my PrimePipe 200 would have the obvious advantage. Perhaps there are reasons why these results are what they are - differences in what the F ratios mean between the two lenses or something else I'm not qualified to speak on.

But from what I see so far - I'm amazed. This lens is the real deal.

UPDATE:

For kicks, I removed the 70-300 from the tripod and tried the same test using handhold, but keeping the 200 on the tripod. I shot off about 5 shots with the 70-300 using careful technique, comparing each shot on-camera, zooming in, and keeping the best one. Results: the 70-300 hand-held EVEN AT 1/5 SEC was crisper than the 200 still on the tripod. The difference wasn't nearly as noticeable, but indeed, I was able to get a better image by hand using IS on the 70-300 than by tripod with the 200.

I know this isn't a comprehensive review, but the 200 2.8 prime has long been my favorite lens. I use it for highly demanding astrophotography, where I think it's a truly special piece of glass, with pin point stars to the edge. I also use it for birding, landscapes and portraits, so I know what it's capable of (I also just adore its bokeh). I thought I was going to regret the 70-300 purchase. Not a chance, so far at least. I can't wait to get it out and about and really put it through some paces. I seriously doubt it will have comparable bokeh, which I love and rely upon a great deal, but I have no concerns about sharpness.

Regarding length, at 70mm it's the same length as the 200. The diameter is a good bit larger. A rough eyeball guess would be 15-18% larger in diameter. It doesn't "feel" like it weighs all that much more. With a decent strap (I use the Carry Speed CS-PRO Camera Strap with Under Arm &, Wrist Strap it's easily a carry-about lens.

Mark
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


18 of 20 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars ...a beautiful piece of technology!, May 12, 2011
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras (Electronics)
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens

I've been using the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for a couple of days to photograph backyard birds, wildlife etc. (which is basically why I bought it) and have it attached to a two year old Canon EOS XSi Rebel. Not a professional camera...but, that's the way I roll. :)

I'm hand holding the camera with AutoFocus set and the Image Stabilization turned on and set to (Normal Mode) -- the camera is also set to continuous shooting when the camera button is pressed -- because birds move around alot, even when standing still.

So far, the images are all Razor Sharp, when viewed at 100% in Photoshop, with a wonderful dreamy (blurred out) background that birds and wildlife should have. I'll upload a few images so you can see what I'm talking about.

The image colors are very vivid and bright...even when zipping the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens out to 300mm (which, I think, would be about 480mm for my particular camera). :)

For me, the lens is slightly heavy...but, not something I cannot get used to. When fully extended, with hood in place, it seems very long, and "out there", but I am getting used to it. The white color of the lens is a "plus" because, I know from experience, the summer sun can really heat up a black lens in a hurry, and potentially damage a very expensive piece of glass -- if ya know what I mean.

I find the the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens to be very fast...even at 300mm using continuous shooting setting. I don't think I could be more satisfied with a telephoto zoom lens. It meets and exceeds all my expetations, and is really a beautiful piece of technology. This is my 3rd Canon "L" lens. Ya don't have to have a really expensive camera to mount this lens to, and get excellent results. :) Highly Recommended! --Katharena Eiermann, 2011
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


10 of 10 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Very Sharp Lens!, February 4, 2013
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras (Electronics)
I'll begin by saying I'm a lady in my sixties with arthritis in both hands.I have only had this lens a short time. I was a little concerned about the weight. I carried it all day two different days and had no problem with the weight at all. It is a great lens to take eagle watching and not have to use a tripod. I own the cheaper canon 70-300 IS also. It is a very good lens and takes very sharp pictures but I decided to move up to the L. I am able to focus this one quicker which you need when photographing birds of any kind. It might be nice to have a 2.8 lens but I've found for the type of photos I take which are mostly outdoors this is the perfect lens. Much easier to carry than the 70-200 L and I really needed the 70-300 for birds. Of course 400mm or 600mm would be nice for eagle photos but I didn't want the extra weight, messing with a tripod or spending any more money. I can carry this all day with no tripod and get some super photos. I took a few pictures inside. The pictures turned out much much better than I thought they would especially since I hardly ever take indoor pictures. I am very happy with this lens.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


16 of 18 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Outstanding!, June 7, 2011
By 
Jon Shaver (Frisco, Texas) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras (Electronics)
I am (was) a Nikon man. My camera inventory includes D700, D300s, and D7000 cameras. I own and use every modern lens made by Nikon including the superstars--14-24 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, and the big 300 mm f2.8. All this means I know great equipment and am willing to invest in it.

Because I needed a higher res (than what I have) camera for a job, I acquired the Canon 5D Mark II 21 mp camera. Included in the order was the 70-300 L f4 IS II.

A very long story short--in the studio and outdoors for a model shoot (portrait and environmental--waterfall and garden backgrounds), this lens ROCKS! Very fast autofocus, sharp at f4, but fantastic at f8, great bokeh, super color and contrast. I could go on but why?

This is a super lens. I considered going a bit higher end to the 70-200 f2.8 but it's not as good a lens as my Nikon. I originally thought the 70-300 Canon would be a bit of a compromise but other reviews suggested this lens was super and I went for it. And am glad I did. For those reviewers who kvetch about it being an f4 instead of f2.8, the one stop difference is more than compensated for by simply stepping up the ISO a stop. Given the superiority of the current generation of sensors in Canon cameras, it is quite possible to ramp up ISO without noise issues. If you really have to crank up the ISO for shots in the dark, no problem there either. Just use Topaz Labs DeNoise which is the best noise reduction product on the market.

I don't hesitate to recommend this great lens and, unlike some stuff that I've bought for single jobs in the past, both the D5 Mark II and this lens will remain in my inventory of work tools--at least until Nikon is back in business and releases its next generation of pro cameras. On that note by the way, Nikon had better produce a 21 to 24 MP D3/D3x successor at a price point competitive with the Canon D5 Mark II or there will be a lot of pros who do what I've done and that is to use Canon products for their ultra high resolution photo needs.

Hope this helps for any of you sitting on the fence.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 213 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

Details

Search these reviews only
Rate and Discover Movies
Send us feedback How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you? Let us know here.