Canon 5D mK II & Canon EF 75-300 III.
oakfieldphotography.com
Registered Users Posts: 376 Major grins
Hi
I sold my Canon EF 75-300 III lens last year and since the purchase of a Canon 5D Mk2, a constant question keeps going through my mind!
What if i had kept it and would my 5D2 have improve the quality of images that i was getting from this lens over when i was using it on my Canon 40D?
A silly question i know as i have learned that its all about the glass.
Is there anywhere i can see picures taken with this camera lens combination as i have exausted my searches online. I did search using the title of this post and can find next to nothing, even on flickr. Mabey i used the wrong combination of words in my haste.
Kind regards
Patrick.:D
I sold my Canon EF 75-300 III lens last year and since the purchase of a Canon 5D Mk2, a constant question keeps going through my mind!
What if i had kept it and would my 5D2 have improve the quality of images that i was getting from this lens over when i was using it on my Canon 40D?
A silly question i know as i have learned that its all about the glass.
Is there anywhere i can see picures taken with this camera lens combination as i have exausted my searches online. I did search using the title of this post and can find next to nothing, even on flickr. Mabey i used the wrong combination of words in my haste.
Kind regards
Patrick.:D
0
Comments
I have thought the same thing... but with a 70-300IS (the non IS is really not a great lens)... I actually love my 55-250IS efs lens on the 60D for its focal length and a 70-300 would be close but on a FF but with a shallower possible DOF and better light gathering characteristics for the combo.
Interested to see what comes of this thread.
Some of the Tamron SP 70-300mm versions give a better performance at around the same cost, but even they will not produce very nice images beyond a 5" x 7" print, although in very strong light and stopped down a bit and used just in the 70-200mm range they can be OK.
You really have to get up to the Canon EF 70-300mm, f4-5.6 IS USM and (better yet) the Canon EF 70-300mm, f4-5.6L IS USM to get good quality at the largest apertures and out to the 300mm end.
You can research all of these Canon lenses here:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Zoom-Lens-Reviews.aspx
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I've always heard the 75-300 was a "soft" lens, you can see pics on a Canon site (POTN) but there are many alternatives - Canon 70-300, Canon 70-200 f4, Tamron 70-300 VC, etc.
Thankyou Ziggy for your reply.
I agree that the Canon EF 75-300 III lens did not fare well compared to other lenses in the canon range. I had very limited success with this lens and thought to myself that with all of these new software releases some of this lens weakness could be addressed ie Lightroom 4. I suppose you get what you pay for and as an entry lens on a cropped frame camera i could see the attraction for its reach and the price it retails for. It would be very unfair to compare this lens with L glass and even anticlimatic to expect any more quality from its work given the limitation of its glass. For many it was a godsend but for others it would be inevitable that it would be used as a stepping stone on Canons stairway to heaven.
I dont expect Lightroom 4 to come up with miracles regarding this lens but could it even cure 60 percent Of its problems. I guess i will leave this to the experts. Thankyou again Ziggy for putting up with my sometimes unconventional ideas. Well Unconventional to me as i have a hardrive full of pictures i took with this lens on my 40D.
Kind regards
Patrick.
I don't know but the 70-300's are probably worth spending a little more
Yes. I think the 70-210 f4 is one of the cheaper good options. It's "the poor man's L."
It does not reach 300mm (of course).
It is not USM AF motor technology, so AF accuracy may drift over time and with wear.
It is probably no longer supported for repairs by Canon, meaning you would need to search for a third-party repair shop (not necessarily a bad thing).
Another lens of this era, at about twice the cost of the above, is the Canon EF 100-300mm, f5.6 L. It has a better lens formula and that results in better images. It's still not USM, but the better glass might be worthwhile, especially on a 5D MKII body. It's also probably beyond Canon repair, because of the age.
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/202-canon-ef-100-300mm-f56-l-test-report--review
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I was talking about the 2nd one - it does have ring USM. I think as far as the 100-300's go, the USM is better with AF (obviously), and less expensive, while the L is better optically. It is the cheapest L, after all.
WHOA!! Great, great site. Thanks for sharing - it's gone right into my bookmarks!!