Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Canon Lenses (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/canon-lenses-61/)
-   -   [Recovered Thread: 43307] (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/canon-lenses-61/%5Brecovered-thread-43307%5D-41948/)

aladyforty Jan 2, 2005 2:20 AM

Is it worth changing my canon 90-300mm standard cheap lens for an EF 75-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM? will my shots be sharper, easier to take etc. Im considering saving for this lens (Im saving for a few actually) as I take a lot of wildlife and sports shots. I am getting reasonable shots out of the lens I have but know nobody with the more expensive lens to compare shots with. Opinions welcome.

Greg Chappell Jan 2, 2005 2:39 AM

It will help you keep a steady hold at the longer focal lengths- as to how much sharper it really is, that's questionable:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...07&forum_id=65

aladyforty Jan 2, 2005 3:10 AM

ok if I could get this lens for $350.00 aust ($245.00 USA) would it be good value????

redundo Jan 2, 2005 5:46 AM

It almost sounds like you intend to change "like-for-like" appart from the Image Stabilisation there doesn't seem to be a whole heap of a difference between either of these (although I can't be considered a judge of image quality on this!).

There are other options to the 75-300mm as well. Canon have the 100-300 f4.5-5.6 which is said to have a faster, quieter USM-ring motor. Although I have the 100-300 lens (and I am quite happy with it)I can't compare it's focusing speed as I have never used the 75-300 to know how it performs good or bad.But there are also other lenses available from Sigma, Tamron and Tokina which cover this focal length.

Whether you choose to stay with what you've got or go for the 75-300mm you will still be in the cheap plastic-fantastic range of lenses. So you might not want to rule out saving a little longer for something that is clearly head and shoulders above the rest!

aladyforty Jan 2, 2005 5:50 AM

Im still waiting to hear if the lens Im looking at has IS or is just USM. Im wondering because USM alone would be better than not having any at all.

redundo Jan 2, 2005 6:07 AM

There are three versions of the Canon 75-300mm lens;

Canon 75-300 f4-5.6 III

Canon 75-300 f4-5.6 III USM

Canon 75-300 f4-5.6 III USM IS

It can be a little confusing to know which one people are talking about! The 75-300 USM IS is the most recent of the three lenses but as far as I know none of these models are very up to date. The 75-300 USM IS for example uses a micro-motor to autofocus instead of the Ring-motor you get in all the newer models. The Ring-motor is supposed to be faster and quieter then the micro-motor, but like I said in my previous post I have never used the 75-300 to know how significant a difference this makes.

As for the IS - it does have it - but like the micro- vsring- motori'm not sure how effective it is compared to the IS-system in more recent models like the Canon 28-135 IS or 70-200 L IS.

I can't say whether you would find the IS a dramatic improvement over your 90-300, but personally I would trade in an IS lens for steadier hands any day! If you have a good strong, steady grip then IS might not make much of a difference to you!

aladyforty Jan 2, 2005 6:35 AM

thanks, apart from the IS, what about the benifit of USM over non USM lenses, is it all it's made out to be.?

redundo Jan 2, 2005 6:56 AM

USM is supposed to be a very clear winner over non-USM. I did try out a Sigma 70-300 non-USM lens but it wasn't the most comprehensive of tests as an incompatibility issue meant my camera locked up every time I tried to take a shot! The Canon 100-300 USM did feel much better though.

For landscape or portrait shots USM shouldn't really matter, but if you like taking wildlife, sport or action shots it should make quite a difference. USM also allows you to perform manual focus adjustments without ever having to actually flip the lens into manual focus mode - you can leave it in autofocus and simply turn the focusing ring to make quick adjustments. This can be surprisingly handy at times.

aladyforty Jan 2, 2005 7:07 AM

thanks, I just found out that lens lens Im looking at is IS and usm. Im thinking about it:-)

redundo Jan 2, 2005 7:12 AM

My advice would be to compare it to the Canon 100-300mm or even the Tokina 80-400 f/4.5-5.6. Try and find online photos and compare sharpness, contrast of the different lenses. But one thing to consider is that the Canon 100-300 is quite a bit cheaper andsupposedly a little sharper then the Canon 75-300.

I say sharper but from using the 100-300 it does produce quite soft photos on the Canon 10d, but if you need extra sharpening the "Unsharp Mask" in photoshop really does work wonderfully well on the images. In reality I don't think you will find any lens is going to be tack-sharp in this price- and focal- range. It mightcome down tochoosing the best of a soft bunch!


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:09 PM.