Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canon 70-300L IS upgrade?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • B7772ADL
    replied
    Originally posted by yash777 View Post
    I'd say go for the 100-400. I really don't get the logic why Canon came up with a 70-300L. That signals their intention that the 100-400 will probably never be upgraded.
    Have you actually seen a 70-300L? If you have you will instantly see that it is a much more compact lens which will be absolutely perfect for the traveller who wants a high quality L lens which is much smaller, lighter and more compact than traditional L glass. Not everyone wants to lug about a huge piece of metal and glass all the time. If I had a load of spare cash and was travelling alot I daresay I'd be looking at one.

    The 100-400 might not be upgraded immeaditately but it's also worth remembering that the 200-400 with 1.4x integrated converter is in the pipeline which looks an absolutlely amazing lens, although it wont be cheap, but then again L glass wasn't meant to be cheap.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rick C
    replied
    Thanks for the replies. As I expected the old 100-400 is still the firm favourite. However I know I would miss the lower end which means the most expensive option, keep the 70-200 for the low end and buy the 100-400 IS for everything else. Maybe?????
    It would be great to see some shots on JP.Net taken with the 70-300L IS. Anyone spotted any yet?
    Cheers, Rick C

    Leave a comment:


  • Brenden S
    replied
    I shoot with the sigma 50-500, when out doing aviation photography and other photography the extra zoom really does come in handy. The 300mm has its limitations.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jan-Jasinski
    replied
    I used the 100-400L in Montreal yesterday and it's a fantastic lens! I got some superb shots of the AF A380 and thanks to 400mm I got the shots I wanted with a certain spot in the background. My other Nikon friend had only 300mm and said it wasn't enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darren Howie
    replied
    From what i have read and seen its a very high quality lens.
    People who have shot with the 100-400 are saying it has less CA and a little sharper.
    As it has 100mm less range i would hope it does but the extra 100 at the long end comes in handy a lot with the 100-400 so it really depends where and what focal lengths you will use most often.
    I've had 2 100-400's both awesome and sharp throughout the full range with the newer one slightly sharper.
    As with most guys who have used one i highly recommend them..

    Leave a comment:


  • yash777
    replied
    I'd say go for the 100-400. I really don't get the logic why Canon came up with a 70-300L. That signals their intention that the 100-400 will probably never be upgraded.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rick C
    started a topic Canon 70-300L IS upgrade?

    Canon 70-300L IS upgrade?

    Hi folks,
    I am wanting more reach and IS. So I am thinking of trading my Canon 70-200 f4L(non IS) for the new Canon 70-300L IS! It reads very well in the many reviews that I have read but is the Canon 100-400L IS the lens I should go for? Does anyone have real world experience of both lens that can give a comparison between 100-300mm?
    I will use the lens for airport photography, occasionally airshow and perhaps a one off safari someday in the future.
    Opinions and advice would be appreciated.
    Rick C
Working...
X