Welcome to Omgili,
Omgili ( Oh My God I Love It ;) is a search engine for discussions. With Omgili you can find answers and solutions, debates, discussions, personal experiences, opinions and more... To learn more about Omgili click here.
This is a complete preview of the discussion as it was indexed by Omgili crawlers. Use this preview if the original discussion is unavailable.
Click here to view the original discussion.
[http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?message=28949891&changemo...]
Click here to search for discussions with Omgili discussions search engine.
 |
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM: Canon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
--
I'd like to get this lens with the XSi and wanted to know what the thoughts are about this lens.
There's also the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS that's quite a bit cheaper but is it worth saving the money for less mm?
Being relatively new to the big camera world what does the USM stand for?
Both lenses have the image stabilizer.
Just trying to learn a bit more before I start throwin' money around.
Thanks
Les
|
|
USM stands for UltraSonic Motor.
It's a fast and silent AF motor in the lens, that, well does just that;
Focus fast and silent.
As far as the selection goes.
Judging from previous posts on here, the 70-300 is gonna be slightly better but not by far.
I suggest you do a search for a test on these two.
I know I've seen one somewhere.
You cant go wrong with either one.
|
|
Here is a review.
Make of it what you will.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...
...0mm-f-4-5.6-is-usm-lens-review.aspx
|
|
|
Thank you very much, I will take a look at the link.
Thanks,
Les
--
|
|
It's a very good lens.
I don't think you can go wrong with it.
The only negative IMHO is the build quality is not L standard.
|
|
Considering the price difference between them why should it be.
There's the 70-200 F4 L but that does not have IS and is not as weather proofed as the other high end L lenses.
Quote: :
>
It's a very good lens.
I don't think you can go wrong with it.
The
> only negative IMHO is the build quality is not L standard.
|
|
Hi
I have 40D and 70-300.
You will love the reach with this lens.
The imagequality is very good.
Its lightweight but a little flimsy with lenshood attached.
The 55 i dont know.
Get good results in tests but the reach is not adequate for sports or animals.
take a look at photzone.de and slrgear.com.
Mike
|
|
Quote: :
> There's the 70-200 F4 L but that does not have IS
Where are you getting your information from?
My 70-200 f4 has IS.
Dietmar
|
|
The 70-300 and 70-200 f/4L cost about the same, but the L does not have IS.
The 70-200 f/4L IS has IS and costs several hundred dollars more.
Dietmar Quote: :
>
>
Quote: :
> >
There's the 70-200 F4 L but that does not have IS
>
>
>
Where are you getting your information from?
My 70-200 f4 has IS.
>
>
Dietmar
>
--
Jeremy
|
|
It's a great lens.
The only issue is that it is a little soft wide open starting at about 250mm.
One stop down it's great.
Dan
|
|
I own it together with 70-200 2.8 IS.
I think its an excellent lens outdoors.
Good color and contrast, thought needs more boosting than the L lens does.
A lot lighter and smaller, and thats why I have not sold it yet.
I also used to own 70-200 f4, which I sold in favor of the IS and extra reach on this one.
The image quality was not much different to my eyes in the 70-200 range.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/11731152@N00/
|
|
There's a 70-200 F4 L for about $600 without IS then the IS model which comes in at over $1000.
Seeing as how he's asking about the 70-300 IS for a few dollars more he could have the non IS 70-200 F4 L which would give him a bit higher image quality but less range and also no IS.
Dietmar Quote: :
>
>
Quote: :
> >
There's the 70-200 F4 L but that does not have IS
>
>
>
Where are you getting your information from?
My 70-200 f4 has IS.
>
>
Dietmar
>
|
|
|
|