JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you accept the use of cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM is a tele lens for FF and APS-C, manufactured from 2004 to 2017 (discontinued). The focus is done by Ultrasonic AF Motor (Ring-USM), it has image stabilization. The average price, when it has been added to the JuzaPhoto database, is 1390 €;
18 users have given it an average vote of 8.9 out of 10.
MOUNT
This lens is available with the following mounts:
Canon EF: this lens is compatible with reflex fullframe and APS-C Canon EF.
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 195000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:Small footprints, contained chromatic aberrations, attractive prices if purchased used
Cons:Microcontrast levels not very high, especially canvas side, optics very sensitive to the backlight
Opinion:It was the first, as well as the only (at least as of the date of this review) optical zoom produced by Canon with DO technology. This technology allows to contain the dimensions of optics, compared to a traditional solution, wanting an equal level of correction of aberrations: in fact, in the second case it would be necessary a greater number of lenses, with particular materials (e.g. fluorite). On the other hand, the processing is extremely complex, so much so that according to Canon for the DO element the required precision comes to the micrometer: consequently the costs are quite high, and have an unpleasant impact on the price of optics (it is out of production since 2016, although at the moment it is still listed), substantially equal to that of 70-300 f4-5.6 L is usm. In short, the strengths are the small size (at least with the zoom in the wide-angle position) and the good correction of aberrations, as well as good build quality (better than the 70-300 mid-range, which however are less expensive). On the other hand, the microcontrast is not very high, especially on the canvas side: I knew what to expect, and I acquired the conscious optics of such limitation. It is certainly better than a 75-300, but it does not reach the levels of the current 70-300 II is usm. The 70-300 DO has several backlight flare problems: it was one of the flaws of the first generations of Canon's DO targets, with the addition that at the time the anti-reflective treatments of the lenses were not comparable with those of today. With regard to autofocus, the lens was commercialised in 2004, and adopts an old-fashioned ring usm unit, less sophisticated than today's: similar discourse for the stabilizer, noisy and less effective than the current ones. In these respects, the gap with 70-300 II is usm is considerable, since the nano usm unit is very fast, and works better with the dual pixel cmos, especially in movies; the stabilizer of 70-300 is II is quieter and much more effective. In short, unless collector's interests, I would not recommend such an optic: the 70-300 is II is on average higher in all respects, and is new to the figure to which you can find a used 70-300 DO, in a store. In my case, however, the clutter factor was the key point (I own both a 70-200 f4 is and a 100-400 II, but in some cases they are excessively cumbersome and flashy), and I found a specimen of 70-300 DO at a very low price, causing autofocus problems , then resolved with the replacement of the engine usm (150 euros).
Pros:Compactness, weight, focal range, stabilization, AF
Cons:Image quality, stabilizer a little uncertain, price from new.
Opinion:It is a difficult lens, it certainly disappoints lovers of sharpness, however the practicality due to compactness is priceless. I would say that the price it had from new was a real theft, despite the great technology behind it.... Fresnel lens as a diffractive optical element, USM, IS... On the second-hand market, it is reasonably priced, for which the average outlay is worth. Do not expect the yield of the various 70-200 canons, nor the dwarf USM 70-300.... The hard-working version is much worse... but it's a damn convenient lens for quiet exits, and besides, it's not likely to give in to the eye... my specimen has the front a bit dancer, both in the extracted and internal position.... The stabilizer doesn't convince me... I always try to stay in safe times anyway, because, although it works perfectly, I don't think it's very effective, at least on my specimen. Situations in which phenomena of strange internal reflections occur (I think due to the diffractive element), are often also uncritical, making the lens even more difficult. Often you realize the ruined photo only after viewing it and not during the composition. I'm still studying it and I ask.... let's say I would like to recommend it but with reservation... I who am fond of sharpness Suffer in front of the results obtained with this goal, but owning as an alternative only a 70-200 2.8 and several 200mm manual, I can say that between taking home a not perfect photo and not taking it home because of problems of clutter you preferred to leave the zoomone at home, I prefer the first solution. I will try to update the review with some other impression as soon as possible.
Pros:Size, weight, inconspicuous, yield between 100 and 250 mm comparable to the 70/200 f4L
Cons:Unbalanced, hard zumata guinea
Opinion:I agree with everything that is said in weaving the praises of an unjustly mistreated view. Surely the 70/300 L is a little better but for weight, color and size it makes it difficult to seize moments in discretion. The 70/200 f4 is also less discreet. The 70/300 Is is much less performing to me. I am very satisfied and currently use it on Sony A7II and A7RII without any yield problem even with 42 Mpx. The stabilizer is great
Cons:Unbalanced forward, tendency to leak, slight counterlight loss of contrast
Opinion:Bought from England to €350 on FF and APS-H I have not found all the problems of sharpness that you read around (will be a well-managed copy...!). Excellent focal range and is quietly in the backpack, it is not white and you notice little, fast and precise focus without uncertainties and the stabilizer is very effective. Excellent sharpness at F8 a little softer to TA, zero chromatic aberrations. I thought a lot before taking it and read a thousand reviews but in the end despite the doubts was excellent and much better expectations, at 300 and TA there is certainly better but overall has never given me unusable images, indeed. Real ones in a slight drop in contrast against light due to the construction DO but the lens hood helps a lot and the fact that for the weight of the front element the barrel tends to leak if pointed downward.
Pros:Those reported by everyone, length weight discretion and construction
Cons:At least in my model the zoom is rather hard because of the lens output, slightly unbalanced forward, new price.
Opinion:Starting with the assumption that it is now out of production and around the price of the used is definitely interesting, and from the fact that I owned 70-300 L-70-300 is and 70-200 F4 smooth. The 70-300 L is better, but I sold it because it was always at home for weight and its lack of discretion. The 70-300 is what you buy ... a good start to start and have fun. True comparison I'm going to do it with the 70-200 F4 that is smooth or little changes in my opinion because it is in this price range that is the used. RnOra for street use, how often have you "scared" Someone because you had the whitewash? I have several ... even those who wanted to be photographed were posing and the result was a photo to be thrown ... with this objective they will not notice you and they will not matter to you ... what i like ... rnIn Mountain how many times for the weight you left at home the 70-300 l i have so many ... rn Now we come to the comparison with the 70-200 F4: less objective lens and this one knows, between 70 and100 mm sticker a lot more ... between 100-200 are preteent are the same.rn soft 200-thread at the most open focal, well from F8 up.rn sharpness and here's my astonishment ... the DO is Definitely clearer to all the vowels of comparison from F8 up. Definitely and sorry for my length, if you take photographs of the day, travel and count weight is a professional goal to have, if instead look for a blade for good nights and You want to catch the hair at 250m you buy more ... rnAh ps: i do not know why but on apsc is extremely less clear and disapproved.rn
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
