Lens Advice?

[TS L1011]

Hey,
I dropped my camera with Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 USM lens a while ago, and screwed up my lens pretty good. So i'm looking to replace it and have been thinking about the Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens and the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L USM lens. Anyone have any thoughts or opinions on these two lenses?

-Phil

[Tanner_J]

70-200 f4 is the brother of the 2.8 version and has amazing glass. I'd go there before a 70-300.

[LX-A343]

The 70-200 F4 seems to be an amazing glass, judging by many reviews I have seen. So, if you don't need the 200-300 area, take this lens. A good addition would then be something like the Canon 100-400 or the Sigma 80-400 or something along the lines.

[B7772ADL]

70-200 is optically superior. Get a Canon 1.4x convertor later on then you effectively have the same range as the 70-300.

[NeilA330]

1.4x TC on the 70-200 f/4 will become 98-280 maintaining f/5.6 throughout the focal length, compared to the f/4.2

Effectively.

[Greg]

I've owned both and I got rid of the 70-300 fairly quickly. The IS isn't worth it and besides you'll end up with white lens fever anyway.

[Tanner_J]

1.4x TC on the 70-200 f/4 will become 98-280 maintaining f/5.6 throughout the focal length, compared to the f/4.2

Effectively.

I think anyone would want quality over the extra 40mm. Which by the way the 70-200 would reach to 448mm and the 300 to 480mm.

[Airbus_A320]

I've owned both and I got rid of the 70-300 fairly quickly. The IS isn't worth it and besides you'll end up with white lens fever anyway.

I'm actually very pleased with my 70-300, and the fact that it's black and more descrete is good for shooting around most airports.

I am thinking about getting something nice and long though for the times when I want the range and am not concerned about someone calling the fuzz and reporting "a man with a white rocket launcher".

[Tanner_J]

It's not illegal to take photos from a public place, so there's no need to be discreet.

[Airbus_A320]

It's not illegal to take photos from a public place, so there's no need to be discreet.

Yeah, I know that. I still take photos obviously. But I still don't like drawing attention to myself. And (at least to me) it's a good lens, so that's why I use it, if I wasn't happy with the results, the quality would take precident over the color or discreteness. This is the new version of the 70-300 were talking about here, not the old versions which are not nearly as good.

Even so this past July, I was shooting through the windows at ORD for over an hour then got questioned by a DEA agent of all people when I sat down for a few minutes before boarding my flight.

The lens is good quality in a small size and light weight. If I don't feel like taking a lot of weight with me, I just take the grip off of the 20D and can fit that lens and a 24-70 into small case that I can take to class or wherever with me just incase anything good happens.

[haitrieu]

Sigma 135-400mm or 170-500mm if you want a big zoom with a good price .

[NeilA330]

I think anyone would want quality over the extra 40mm. Which by the way the 70-200 would reach to 448mm and the 300 to 480mm.

Excluding the crop factor?? How does that work?

[Simpleboy]

A 1.4x teleconverter on the 70-200.

[NeilA330]

1.4x on 200mm is 280 @ f/5.6, where do you get 448mm?

[Tanner_J]

You get 1.6 from the camera sensor, then another 1.4 from the teleconverter...