Anybody using the Canon EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 IS?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Scott W - 03 Apr 2007 01:09 GMT

I am thinking of buying this lens for my wife to use, she is currently
using a Sigma 70-200, which is not a great lens, pretty bad in fact.
But she likes to photograph flowers among other things and I have been
unable to find the specs on how close the Canon lens can focus, does
anyone know? The Sigma does ok as a almost macro lens and she uses it
a fair bit for that, so it would be nice if the canon could do fairly
well at this.

Also for those who have this lens how do you like it over all?

Thanks much

Scott

Reply to this Message

JimKramer - 03 Apr 2007 01:29 GMT

> I am thinking of buying this lens for my wife to use, she is currently
> using a Sigma 70-200, which is not a great lens, pretty bad in fact.
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Scott

I swapped my 70-200mm F2.8 IS for one for about an hour...

It is a vast improvement over the 75-300 USM IS F4.5-5.6 in terms of
focus speed and image quality. Still has the extending front section :-
(

The minimum focus distance is listed as 4.9 feet (1.5M)

A short extension tube will change that drastically.

Having said that, look at the 100mm Canon Macro lens. Much better for
closeup work, Much better!

Jim

Reply to this Message

Scott W - 03 Apr 2007 02:36 GMT

> > I am thinking of buying this lens for my wife to use, she is currently
> > using a Sigma 70-200, which is not a great lens, pretty bad in fact.
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> Having said that, look at the 100mm Canon Macro lens. Much better for
> closeup work, Much better!

Thanks much for the info. She mostly shoots at the long end of the
70-300 with fewer macro shots, so the macro is somewhat secondary.
And the macro lens I really lust after is the MP-E 65mm f/2.8,
although it would not be that good for flowers.

Scott

Reply to this Message

Mardon - 03 Apr 2007 02:58 GMT

> And the macro lens I really lust after is the MP-E 65mm f/2.8,
> although it would not be that good for flowers.
> Scott

Agreed, although I photographed these very tiny wildflowers with my MP-E
65mm:
http://www.JustPhotos.ca/galleries/macro/images/012719.jpg

Here are four grains of table salt that I also photographed with the same
lens:
http://www.JustPhotos.ca/galleries/macro/images/033305.jpg

Reply to this Message