| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
|
  | sent on 21 Febbraio 2013 Pros: Low price, IS Cons: Soft over 200mm, slow AF, rotating front element, lens hood not included Opinion: This was my first "non-kit" lens, it's a great lens to extend your focal lenght, it's useful for portraits, events and big wildlife. The IS was very useful. But after some months using it I noticed it falls and tried to deal with it: I rarely exceeded 200mm, when photographing birds I had to use f/8 or narrower to get a sharp image (slow speed or high ISO needed to compensate). I sold it and bought the 70-200mm f/4 L non-IS (this is the only thing that I miss from the 70-300mm), I recommend to save a little bit more and go for the 70-200mm. |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
 | sent on 03 Maggio 2022 Pros: Autofocus, stabilizer, sharpness, weight, dimensions Cons: On my specimen the rotation of the ring to vary the focal length is a bit 'too rigid Opinion: Bought used and paired with a Canon EOS90D and an EOS2000D. Obviously it does not have the quality of the most recent and expensive optics but still defends itself well (for the type of photography I do, mainly dynamic subjects, cars, planes, birdlife). The AF is accurate, fast and quiet, I do not find the noise described by others. The stabilizer is very good, stabilizing the image well even pointing at fast-moving subjects. Combined with the 2000D it has a strong vignetting that has disappeared by combining it with the 90D (sometimes there are unhappy combinations between machine and lens, it is not the first time that I hear of problems that disappear simply by combining the lens with another camera body). On my specimen, however, the rotation of the ring to vary the focal length is a bit too rigid and sometimes tends to make small shots. This is the only flaw detected on this lens (and that is probably just mine). All in all he always gave me good quality images and overall I am more than satisfied. |
 | sent on 08 Aprile 2021 Pros: Small, Light, Economical, good yield in colors and sharpness for its price range, effective stabilizer. Cons: Barrel that rotates with focus, a little noisy and plastic. Opinion: I took used this lens with two years of seller guarantee at a really affordable price. Bought to have a forklift that can replace in case of failure the 70-200 2.8L that I sometimes use with the 1.4x II (in sports photography I need to use the reduced DOF to clean the background). Obviously as quality, solidity, sharpness, focus speed, price are not comparable optics. As machines I use a 77D and a 5Dsr that as a sensor density grant very little to defects. I personally recommend this objective, but I realise that with this range of objectives it is very fortunate. I had for example an Efs 15-85 that, up to 15 or 18 Megapixels defended well, passed to 24 I went crazy to have shots in focus at 15mm and read reviews instead of praising its quality. The 70-300 in question I believe will become my companion for hiking in the mountains (which are not aimed at photographic hunting) because it is a really good compromise weight / quality and price / quality. In a nutshell it is an optics that takes you into situations perhaps at risk without having the anxiety to lose two salaries in case of accidental damage. I am used to optics such as the 24-70 2.8L II, of course they are light years away as optical and mechanical quality, but if you are lucky enough to buy, now only used, a good specimen is a really good deal. After all, it's still a mid-to-low-end perspective made in Japan. |
  | sent on 27 Febbraio 2018 Pros: Lightness, versatility, portability, color rendering, quietness and (hearing, hearing) sharpness throughout the focal range., Price. Cons: Outrageous hood that, if you do not remove the automatic maf, you risk ruining something to put it or take it off. The front lens rotates and the maf ring is the same. Opinion: Found practically new on ebay, I took it for a few mm. Plus in situations of sporting events. I already have the 70_200 is f4 L, but, in fact, at some moments I remain short. I tried in the park in front of the house in different diaphragms and I can not really complain since: it is clear enough, has an excellent color rendering, is quiet, has a very good stabilizer ... Of course you have to be careful do not rest your fingers on the ring of the maf because it rotates, but who cares. For 200 euros I found a sample that does not have the flaws mentioned by other users. I will use it mainly for soccer matches paired with the 70_200 f4 is L, on a second body. Apparently, I was lucky. |
 | sent on 08 Marzo 2017 Pros: Quality 'media construction, dual IS mode' Cons: Sharpness at longer focal lengths, difficulty 'engagement of maf Opinion: I can not speak very well of this lens. If one decides to take a 300 would expect better performance on more 'focal lengths and so' not 'was, at least on my copy. Ugly and noisy in the maf with that rotation. I do not say a banality 'when I say that the 55-250 IS II total (construction part) returns the best files of this glass I sold almost immediately. Grade 6 |
 | sent on 11 Dicembre 2016 Pros: good compromise between quality and price; excellent image stabilizer three stop, sharpness Cons: front swing, hood not seriern Opinion: Goal who honestly does his job, bought used from a friend at a really low price he was selling it for sharpness problems after 200 m. I took room service Milan to make the calibration of lenses and with 60 euro the lens is perfect now with 300m to 5.6 is a blade and I am really satisfied. I must say that is a bit 'noisy during the focus but it is not a problem for me.rn |
 | sent on 11 Agosto 2016 Pros: price, image quality, sharpness up to 300mm Cons: for the price no one, I would say the focus ring that moves and which therefore must not touch Opinion: I think it's time to stop to appreciate a lens just because a thousand Euros. I read that is not sharp or loses to 300mm ?? https://youpic.com/image/8609244/ crap ... even in this picture in a condition quite outside what should be his work (a tele is certainly not a lens to make close up of a flower ) with the minimum aperture (so a PDC anything) at full extension (300mm), the result is excellent. I would like to see what makes the most emblazoned L apart from costing 3 times ... rnmeditate people meditate ... |
 | sent on 27 Febbraio 2016 Pros: Price, quality construction (for the price), image quality up to 200mm Cons: nititezza than 200mm. autofocus. Opinion: a really good zoom lens, focal in up to 200 is fantastic, sharp and crisply rendered image. But beyond 200mm there is a progressive loss of sharpness, use astrofotografico I noticed more and more than 200mm an apparent coma on the sidelines, which translates into a strong vignetting in classical photography. The autofocus is not the best and sometimes in non-critical lighting conditions does its job well. The hood must be bought separately. For what it costs remains a great zoom, I do not regret buying Whereas in the same focal lengths we have to spend three times more to get better. Rated 7 |
 | sent on 09 Settembre 2015 Pros: good image quality, light weight, price Cons: Sin is USM but not full time manual focus Opinion: The selection of Canon tele is very wide. It ranges from 55-250 for APS-c, to 70-200 for Full Frame, from a variety of solutions (stabilized or not) including the 70-300 DO. In this context the 70-300 IS USM is placed in the middle with a well-defined profile. Compared to others, the features that distinguish it are that it is full-frame (+), lightweight (+), stabilized (+) and in addition the optical performance that leaves no wishes unfulfilled. Of course if you need a lens Tropicalised or the focus of the 2.8, you have to look elsewhere, but at prices that are often three to four times as much. Do not underestimate the question footprint / weight: it is one thing to lug around 1 kilo and a half of the 2.8 stabilized (perhaps claiming its 20 centimeters in the bag) account to find a corner of the bag 600 grams of this. And in fact it happened so often. So overall, a lens covering of a well-defined, specific uses in that only makes us regret the bianchini (stabilized) and who often sits in the bag ready all'uso.rnrnDetto an accTwas the characteristics field that numbers can not say. The optical performance is generally very good, with only a slight decrease to 300mm. There is the wow effect when you zoom in to 200% but it is also true that if the composition is correct and does not crop the image and there is good. The contrast is good; I see around many more contrasted images but for my taste is so good. Now I did not detect any particular problems of flare. The stabilizer is very good (to 300mm of 5D1, 13mpx shutter can be released 1/20). It 'a bit' noisy limiting the use in the video (which I do not freaks). L 'autofocus is average. It is not distinguished for speed. It is distinguished by reliability in contexts such as landscape, portrait, street. The motor is not ultra-quiet but doing neither video nor bird does not affect me. Attention is that USM but not è full-time manual focus.rnrnNel complex lens that may be underestimated because it does not offer premium features (such as a beautiful iris, tropicalization, lenses at the top), but is a great lens for amateurs and for light use. In addition, at the price that is used it is a must. |
 | sent on 23 Dicembre 2014 Pros: good quality 'general optics, light and compact, very cheap (especially in' used). Cons: poor construction, games between the lens and dials, front lens that rotates. Opinion: I had read little positive opinions on the performance of 'optical after 200 mm, but the 6D, my copy does not denote declines evident and even 300 mm the quality' in the center and 'very good and closed at f9, the edges become fully usable. And 'light and compact. Obviously missing the hood but I recruited a few euro compatible and works well. Stabilizer and autofocus good, but maybe not at the level of the models more 'recent. The construction and 'economic activity in plastics and known games evident in rings and on the front lens. The latter unfortunately wheel and the use of the polarizer and 'a little' brigoso. Surely and 'a lens that would need modernizing. Nothing to say about render photographs, sharp images and good focus. For the price at which it is used, and 'a bargain. |
 | sent on 23 Aprile 2014 Pros: Stabilized with axial mode switch, great zoom range, a little flare and aberration controlled. Good detail to the intermediate focal lengths. Cons: Lack of clarity over 200mm, the front element rotates during focusing, the lens hood is not supplied. IS is not quiet enough for video. Opinion: Good optics more suited for full frame sensors, low viscosity (12Mpix) for APS-C. The building is more than decent, even if in practice it is not very pleasant to use, the front element rotates making it very difficult to use graduated filters or polarizer, to insert the lens hood should be a force (reasonable), but given the construction is transferred on the entire system of the AF motor generating stress, what is to be avoided by setting the MF that physically disengages the AF motor from the ring focus integral with the front element. On APS-C is sufficiently clear up to 200 mm, close the diaphragm helps a lot. From 200 to 300 is acceptable only from f / 8 onwards. On FF sensors show a little dense acceptable yield up to 300 mm, but that is the limit of its risolvenza. Having an APS-C or full of magapixel a modern FF does not pay absolutely with this view. The AF speed is more than enough, used in AI Servo with center point (certainly sharp enough even at 300mm) recomes out to draw good people constantly on the move, thanks to its excellent precision of focus. The limits are outside the AF used in "One Shot AF" where this perspective certainly pay duty in respect of systems faster and more expensive. The image stabilization is effective, but clearly audible, probably valid for 3 stops, to disable on a tripod in IS as opposed to the newer optical fluctuates minimally even if the media is stopped (practice to be followed in each case). Blurred more than decent. |
 | sent on 04 Marzo 2014 Pros: Focal range and versatility, stability, overall quality. Cons: Tropicalization, auto focus, rotating front element. Opinion: It 'a lens extremely versatile, compact and lightweight and the quality more than decent. I read the other reviews and I understand that there has to be some variability in quality from specimen to specimen. In my case I have made several comparisons with both the old bianchino 70-200mm L 4 that with the new stabilized and, frankly, I found that being in a bit behind on the whole trip (70-200mm). If the multiplied bianchino returns a slightly higher quality at the expense of a slightly lower LF (280mm vs. 300mm). I also got to try it multiplied with the kenko 1.4X with satisfactory results, especially closing 2/3 stop. Obviously it is not a perfect lens, but considering the cost is really very convenient. The only downside I would say is that the AF speed, which is inadequate for photo hunting of birds or for motor sports. However, it remains more than decent and absolutely valid for other applications. Inconvenient also the rotation of the front element inMAF. All in all it is a great lens as a handyman and it costs a fraction of its homologous noble "L". |
 | sent on 29 Ottobre 2013 Pros: IS, intermediate focal sharpness, good quality / price ratio Cons: brightness, slow AF, front swing Opinion: My first zoom, gave me good satisfaction in the field, constitutes a good compromise quality / price, it loses a little 'to the maximum focal length, Af quiet enough but not very precise suffering especially in low light conditions. Today would suggest doing a little effort Economic and go to 70-200 mm f4 L USM are lost and is but you gain much in clarity and sharpness. |
|
| sent on 02 Luglio 2013 Pros: Price-quality ratio very very good, versatile Cons: Lens hood not included, case not included Opinion: E 'was (and is) my first tele-lens. I use it a lot to take pictures of individual components of bands playing ... I've used it in the concert of Toto .. I was not very close to the stage, but with this 70/300 from photographs seem taken a few feet from them .. rnConsiderando that I was in the audience into a frenzy, considering the few lights used in stage and considering that I had to shoot with speed 1 / 80, 1/100 freehand, the photos came with razor-sharp 1600 Iso.rnLo also used to photograph the moon at particular times, or photograph in the foreground some insect or animal rnDirei .. excellent .. although it is not the L series, its working fine it does! |
 | sent on 28 Aprile 2013 Pros: No doubt a good compromise between quality and price, excellent image stabilization to three stops, the zoom range is very functional for sports and nature photography; precise focus. Cons: Slightly noisy during the focus but for me it is irrelevant loss of image quality at maximum focal length. Opinion: As previously mentioned is a good compromise between quality and price. The excellent image stabilizer allows you to follow the lens and shoot even at times lower in low-light. And 'possible to set the image stabilizer so that only the correct vertical vibrations to' occorenza do not want. The ultra-low dispersion glass element corrects chromatic aberrations. Great contrast and blurred for portraits. As a whole appears to be satisfactory sharpness. |
 | sent on 16 Marzo 2013 Pros: Quality / price ratio, lightness, color rendering, good detail to the intermediate focal and image stabilization. Cons: Image too soft at maximum focal length and maximum aperture, autofocus slow and noisy, poor build quality. Opinion: Objective performing his job honestly, but denoting the limits of sharpness at maximum focal length, even if the situation improves significantly closing the focal length up to F8. The autofocus is slow and noisy its true Achilles' heel, but those who are not willing to spend high digits and does not require a lens for dynamic photo, can be found in a good 70-300 zoom. The color rendition is always pleasant and balanced, even if the backlight, especially at the edges of the image, chromatic aberrations out there, but you can easily fix in PP. |
 | sent on 12 Marzo 2013 Pros: Price Cons: Brightness Opinion: Meanwhile, how come there is no in FA ultrasound, when the lens body is written the word chiramente Ultrasonic? What is it about? The opinions above comments I see ungenerous syndrome (cheap maybe?) When you just look at the photos taken with this lens and published below, to understand what it is! Take, for example, that the moon, which was taken with the max zummata and with a 2x multiplier and also non-Canon. Not only that, the picture is certainly magnified because I have made an equal and know it's true: you tell me what you can expect more with 440 euro? |
user6500
 | sent on 22 Settembre 2012 Pros: Yield between 70 and 135 discrete, efficient stabilizer, weight and size. Cons: Yield bad between 200 and 300, tendency to "alonare" bright spots to 300 mm, poor construction, and slow autofocus ring of focus that turns on automatically. Opinion: I've had two copies in evidence before switching from 70 200 to 300 4is 4is, and I have disappointed a lot of both. The yield after the 200 is poor and 300 bad, but not exciting fair between 70 and 135. A 300 also has a tendency to split the bright spots in a particularly unpleasant, especially on a dark background which creates a "halo" tremendous. Between 70 and 200 this optical center is less than 18 200 Canon and the edge is just a hair better, this is more than enough for me. And if we put the effort after ........... 200 The autofocus often tries to empty and is very slow, even if accurate, also the focus ring rotates automatically, the construction is ridiculous for the price at which it is sold. Good instead of the stabilization system. Strongly discouraged, do not understand the favorable reviews of photozone & C, vote for me 4 little. Canon has screwed up here, but it also happens in the best families ........ |
 | sent on 19 Febbraio 2012 Pros: lightness range of focal lengths, price Cons: AF, sharpness, lens hood is not standard Opinion: It 'was my first telephoto zoom bought especially for nature photography. It 'a lightweight, easy to carry and very versatile with a good image quality as long as you have to close a couple of stops for ottenre maximum. The AF found it noisy and low light tends not to hang well. The hood does not come with the lens. I sold it to go to the Canon EF 100-400mm F/4.5-5.6 L IS USM for the best image quality and zoom range more useful for photo hunting. |
 | sent on 05 Ottobre 2011 Pros: Value for money, range of focal lengths, stabilizer, lightness. Cons: AF slow, brightness, lens hood not included. Opinion: The 70-300 is a good lens that has its low cost and the range of focal lengths that allow it to be versatile. The image quality, good, falls a bit 'after the 250mm while remaining decent however: as noted by others just close a couple of stops. The stabilizer is effective, light weight allows you to carry it anywhere easily, thanks to its reduced. The weaknesses are two: AF, which despite being marked USM, it is very fast and makes it less suitable for the objective of the airborne photo hunting or rapid and irregular motion, and then the brightness. Finally, there is the question of the hood which must be purchased separately. |
 | sent on 04 Ottobre 2011 Pros: Price, stabilizer and focal length Cons: Af, brightness, quality of 'image over 200mm Opinion: It's a good tele considering the price, you can go from portraits to sports and wildlife photos in a matter of prayer, good build quality excellent stabilizer with the switch for mode 1 and 2, the flaw is sometimes af, if the subject is poorly lit or under special lighting is lost and is a little slow to hang up but this problem very often overcome by using a single point. The quality of 'image is high, falls slightly over 200mm so you're forced to close most of the diaphragm. I use it mainly for landscape photos and pictures of surfers and often recommend it, I doubt that the usual money you can find better. |
 | sent on 26 Settembre 2011 Pros: price, stabilizer, versatility Cons: brightness, sharpness at most focal low magnification, lens hood is not standard Opinion: A very versatile lens a little less than 500 euro. This is the greatest asset of the 70-300 IS USM. The zoom is very broad and allows a wide range of shots in different situations. Very good response even at F5.6 up to 200mm. On 300mm loses a bit of sharpness at F 5.6 but soon found himself at F8 where he works perfectly. The stabilizer functions optimally, is selectable in two modes: the mode "1" stabilizes the aim both horizontally and vertically, while the mode "2" acts only in the sense of displacement of the camera, thus resulting useful for performing panning of subjects in motion. Its limit is the low light, and if you take pictures in low light you will often have to fight hard to focus, but as we all know the lumonosità a lens is expensive. I would say that for those seeking a more than adequate telephoto at an affordable price this is the best choice. The lens hood and case are not included unfortunately it is not cheap to buy them separately. A note about compatibility with multipliers: I use it with a kenko 2x and in normal light conditions up to 200mm does not lose autofocus. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
