Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 13, 2005, 2:56 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3
Default

I'm considering these Canon lenses with a new 20D. Is the 70-300 DO-IS lense actually better than the new 70-300 IS? I'm shooting kids sports, and would like a smaller lense if it makes sense. Also, I have considered the 70-200 (2.8) L IS for the extra light and speed, but the weight and size feels like a concern since my wife and 18 year old son may also use the camera, and using a mono-pod will not be realistic very often. That's why I want the IS on both lenses. My other lense purchase would be the 17-85 IS. Thanks for your advise.
john myers is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 13, 2005, 3:28 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 117
Default

I don't know about most of the lens's your are talking about. I just got a new 20d and have the 70-200 f/2.8L and used it for the past several weekends at the kids baseball and football games. GREAT LENS... Even with the weight. Here's a link to, just click on photo's taken with this lens.



http://home.comcast.net/~jlacasci/wsb/index.html



Joe
jlacasci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 19, 2005, 6:50 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 175
Default

John - I don't have either, but I read a lot of user and technical reviews and have owned a bunch of tele lenses. The general consensus is that the DO model is not worth the money, in terms of image quality, but is a great travel tele as it is pretty small. The new 70-300 IS is getting some good reviews. Niether of these lenses do well in low light, so if your kids play late or indoors, spring for the 70-200 2.8 from either Canon or Sigma.

Remember, IS doesn't help with sports, as it will reduce camera shake but will not freeze movement. Only larger apertures do this. Bottom line is that IS is only really useful for static (still) subjects. But, a max aperture of 5.6 is more than adequate for outdoor daytime activities, sunshine or not. Around sunset or later is when you need a 2.8 or faster lens. Hope this helps.

For daylight kids sports, I recommend the Canon 70-200 f4L. The image quality far surpasses both lenses you mention, and it is a lightweight lens.


Chris
_________________________
http://www.imagineimmagery.com


john myers wrote:
Quote:
I'm considering these Canon lenses with a new 20D. Is the 70-300 DO-IS lense actually better than the new 70-300 IS? I'm shooting kids sports, and would like a smaller lense if it makes sense. Also, I have considered the 70-200 (2.8) L IS for the extra light and speed, but the weight and size feels like a concern since my wife and 18 year old son may also use the camera, and using a mono-pod will not be realistic very often. That's why I want the IS on both lenses. My other lense purchase would be the 17-85 IS. Thanks for your advise.
ChrisDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 19, 2005, 9:08 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

John,¬*I wouldn't consider any lens that wasn't at least F2.8 max aperture at the wide end.¬*Not sure it makes sense to loan a camera like a 20D to a teenager or the wife.¬*Buy¬*them their own cameras and keep your 20D for yourself. ¬*Better safe than sorry.¬* ¬*IS is overrated, especially for sports.¬*¬*-- Terry¬*
terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 19, 2005, 11:28 PM   #5
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

yup, IS is not substitute for a fast lens... get a 2.8 for sure..

-dustin
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 20, 2005, 6:40 AM   #6
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

The old 75-300 was pretty much universally regarded as a dog.

I got the 17-85 + 70-300 DO combination for my 20D a year ago and am not sorry. If I were buying now however I'd seriously consider the new 70-300.

The DO is an unusual lens, and it's single outstanding feature is the optical quality it packs in to its small form. Is it better than the new 70-300? Probably a little bit, but certainly not as much as the price difference would suggest, and I'd expect the new 70-300 to be as sharp.

The DO is a fantastic travel lens, a good all-rounder, and excellent for landscapes.

But if you're looking specifically for sports or wildlife in less-than-perfect light then you'd be better off with a 2.8 for sure. If you can afford it then go for the 70-200 IS L and a teleconverter or two.

I think that it's also worth mentioning that IS is not useless for action shots. Why? Well because at 300mm on the 1.6 crop -> EFL 480mm which suggests a shutter speed of around 1/500s, which is pretty fast.

For sports like soccer you might well be able to get away with 1/250s or even 1/125s for freezing the action, but you're likely to run into problems because of camera shake. But the IS will help give you usable shots at those shutter speeds; it's also worth mentioning that the 2-mode IS on the DO and 70-200 L IS gives you the panning mode too, which helps to stablize the image in the vertical plane only, this can be used to good effect in sports phototography.

So you'd really want IS as well as a fast aperture 2.8 if you can manage it. If you can only afford one of the two then get the 2.8 aperture.


For the kind of photography I do the perfect 2-lens combo for the 20D is still the 17-85 + 70-300 DO.

http://vanderwooks.blogspot.com

If/when I ever upgrade to the 5D or successor I'll get the 24-105 L, but I'll be keeping the DO as its companion.

Michael Reichmann over at luminous landscape loves his DO too, and uses it extensively when he travels.


peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 20, 2005, 10:33 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
LBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 661
Default

Pretty much what Peripatetic has said above has been my advice over the last year on this site. The 70-200 2.8 IS is simply a winner. If you want to spend that kind of money of course. I use the lens a great deal, and I'm never disapointed. On your 20 D you have some extra reach also, so thats a plus if you want the long end. Attach a 1.4 x and atf4 it still performs.

mmm indoor sports... can alway cause problems if not well lit though.
LBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 20, 2005, 10:39 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

Hards80 wrote:
Quote:
yup, IS is not substitute for a fast lens... get a 2.8 for sure..

-dustin
But IS on a fast lens is real nice.
bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 24, 2005, 9:34 AM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 69
Default

I found the 30-300 IS f4-5.6 quite useful for crew racing photos. Focusing was fast, and the ability to quickly zoom from 70-300mm was appreciated. This lens has the latest version of IS, whichcan function in panning mode when panning horizontally while following the action. This can be important in lower light situations. While a faster lens such as f2.8may be helpful indoors, keep in mind the extra weight and cost of such a lens. Also, an f2.8 tele lens wide open has very little depth of field, hence focusing must be right on and fast.

exif for this shot: ISO 400, 1/1000 sec, 70mm at f8, Rebel XT with Canon 70-300 f4-5.6 IS.
Attached Images
 
ropp is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:43 AM.