70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS lens

[rpcrowe]

I was at a Canon presentation tonight and one of the attendees had the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS lens on her 5Diii. It's really a meat compact looking lens. It would be a lot easier to carry than my 70-200mm f/4L IS and 300mm f/4L IS lenses and actually less expensive than both those two lenses.

The only drawbacks that I see are... one stop less at 300mm which can really be important in lower light levels and the lack of the quite super thin DOF of the 300mm at f/4. Additionally, I own a 1.4x TC which works quite well on the 300mm lens increasing that lens to a 420mm f/5.6...

Since I already own the 70-200mm f/4L IS and the 300mm f/4L IS lenses as well as a 1.4x TC; I am going to stand pat and keep what I know and am satisfied with. However, if I were considering purchasing the two lenses, I would really look hard at that short barrel 70-300mm f/4L IS lens...

[Bobobird]

As a long time user of this lens, I agree that it should get very very serious consideration. Yes, it is that good.

As for the 1 stop loss of light compared to f4 lens. On older generation cameras, yes. On those released over the last 2 or so years, no.

The IS on this is superb and I can shoot as low a 1/10sec if needed. Add MFD at < 4 feet and...

[FootLoose]

+1 I bought the 70-300 about 6 months ago and I am very happy with it.

[IzzieK]

+1 to Greg's comment. I also have the 70-300mm and am very happy with it. At least it stays on my camera more than any other lens.

[BrianA61]

I have the 70-300 DO IS USM lens and it is even more compact and lighter than the 70-300 L. I bought it because I use it in travel and wildlife photography and, in that scenario, size DOES matter. My 5D2 body is already heavy enough without adding the weight of the L lenses. This DO lens makes it more tolerable to hang the camera strap on my neck. So, if you're looking for a light, compact lens that takes some really good pics, give this one a try. It is also slightly cheaper than the heavy L lenses. My $.02.

[Adrian]

We have the diffractive optics (DO) lens as well and have brought it on our current Japanese trip mainly for use on our 70D (crop). It is without doubt a bit softer than some of our L glass, but the huge advantage in size and weight is quite telling and it balances well on the camera. We have the 70-200 f2.8 L with us as well (and a 2x converter) for use on the 5DIII and will do some comparisons when we get out of Tokyo.

I have been tempted by the 70-300L at times, but as we have had the 70-300DO for several years I can't really justify the swap.

[DanK]

Richard,

I'm in your boat, but minus the 300mm prime. I bought the 70-200 f/4 IS when I shot only a crop sensor camera. It is a wonderful lens, but if I were doing this over with the FF camera I use most of the time now, I would be sorely tempted to buy the 70-300 (the L you were referring to, not the DO). One drawback is the extra stop (with a TC, you have f/8 at the long end, which is not ideal for AF). The other is the additional weight., which I think is about 250 g.

Dan

[loosecanon]

I think the big advantage of the 70-200 f4L is the weight to carry, I also use mine with a 1.4 or 2x converter (latter with 5D3 to keep focusing) The 300f4L is also a good lens, and again with a 1.4X and 7D makes a great wildlife lens. In practice I find usually I need the longer reach so using a prime is no drawback.