Thoughts on this lens please Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM

[operanut1972]

Hi all,

Am now proud owner of a Canon 550D, I want a decent tele zoom for birds wildlife, that doesn't weigh a ton, the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM seems to fit the bill, at least it does on paper. Has anyone used or got one and what thoughts do you have? I am stuck in a wheelchair with limited arm strength, I need good glass that doesn't weigh a ton.

I'm hoping to hire one for the weekend to see if I can live with it.

Thanks for any advice given in advance

[gobbiner]

Originally Posted by operanut1972

Hi all,

Am now proud owner of a Canon 550D, I want a decent tele zoom for birds wildlife, that doesn't weigh a ton, the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM seems to fit the bill, at least it does on paper. Has anyone used or got one and what thoughts do you have? I am stuck in a wheelchair with limited arm strength, I need good glass that doesn't weigh a ton.

I'm hoping to hire one for the weekend to see if I can live with it.

Thanks for any advice given in advance

Its a good lens that fits your requirements, i had it and took some great photos with it, the trouble is no matter what lens you have you always want longer, thats why i got the 100-400 its a great lens, but with you being in a wheelchair and limited arm strength i would say go for it, i dont think you will be disappointed have fun...Ray

[PMG]

I've wondered about the 400 f5.6 - I've seen one in use but not tried it yet but it may be the way I have to go if I can no longer hoist my heavy pack. The 100-400 we have held onto in case we have to take a step back from the primes tho as many have commented the images are darker and softer - tho some of this can be remedied. I have no knowledge of the 70-300 so will be interested to hear about how this performs - and see some test shots too Steve

Pauline

Pricewise there isn't much difference between the 70-300 and the 100-400 so why not have the extra 100mm?? I'm just curious??!

[gobbiner]

Originally Posted by PMG

I've wondered about the 400 f5.6 - I've seen one in use but not tried it yet but it may be the way I have to go if I can no longer hoist my heavy pack. The 100-400 we have held onto in case we have to take a step back from the primes tho as many have commented the images are darker and softer - tho some of this can be remedied. I have no knowledge of the 70-300 so will be interested to hear about how this performs - and see some test shots too Steve

Pauline

Pricewise there isn't much difference between the 70-300 and the 100-400 so why not have the extra 100mm?? I'm just curious??!

Hi Pam the Canon 70-300 is £355 on amazon weight, 630g
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...r-21/ref=nosim
Canon 100-400 is £1199 weight, 1360g
A big difference really if the op is in a wheelchair with poor arm strength

[operanut1972]

Hi Pauline & Ray

Thanks for your replies.

I'd love the extra reach I really would but I would struggle with the weight. I used the G2 system because it gave me 'supposedly' the same features as a DSLR without the weight. It proved to be wrong. But I would struggle with prime lenses weight. So I figure go for L quality glass in a reasonable weight, will have to see how it goes, just found out the hire company near me is out of 70-300 this weekend so will wait til next and then upload shots and thoughts.

Ray - was there much in the way of compromise with your lens or did the glass give you the quality you were looking for? Have you got any images in the Gallery that you shot using it?

All the best

[gobbiner]

Originally Posted by operanut1972

Hi Pauline & Ray

Thanks for your replies.

I'd love the extra reach I really would but I would struggle with the weight. I used the G2 system because it gave me 'supposedly' the same features as a DSLR without the weight. It proved to be wrong. But I would struggle with prime lenses weight. So I figure go for L quality glass in a reasonable weight, will have to see how it goes, just found out the hire company near me is out of 70-300 this weekend so will wait til next and then upload shots and thoughts.

Ray - was there much in the way of compromise with your lens or did the glass give you the quality you were looking for? Have you got any images in the Gallery that you shot using it?

All the best

Edit i got this wrong i didnt see the L Sorry ...Ray

[pressld2]

Steve, is there any way you could rig up a bracket to your chair that would hold the lens and camera making weight less of an issue? I'm thinking some sort of armature that could be swung out of the way when not in use or swung round to bring the camera to your eye when you need it.

I think you may want more reach than 300mm and unless it's a very bright day you'll probably want a long lens supported by something anyway.

Dave P.

[operanut1972]

Originally Posted by gobbiner

Hi Pam the Canon 70-300 is £355 on amazon weight, 630g
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 IS USM Lens: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics
Canon 100-400 is £1199 weight, 1360g
A big difference really if the op is in a wheelchair with poor arm strength

Hi Gobbiner,

I am considering this lens as a stop gap but the lens I'm asking about is the L series Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM it's about £1200 depending on where you go view a review can be found here Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM Lens Review

Thanks for your help though

[gobbiner]

Originally Posted by operanut1972

Hi Gobbiner,

I am considering this lens as a stop gap but the lens I'm asking about is the L series Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM it's about £1200 depending on where you go view a review can be found here Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM Lens Review

Thanks for your help though

Opps sorry Steve i need to get new specs

[gobbiner]

Originally Posted by PMG

I've wondered about the 400 f5.6 - I've seen one in use but not tried it yet but it may be the way I have to go if I can no longer hoist my heavy pack. The 100-400 we have held onto in case we have to take a step back from the primes tho as many have commented the images are darker and softer - tho some of this can be remedied. I have no knowledge of the 70-300 so will be interested to hear about how this performs - and see some test shots too Steve

Pauline

Pricewise there isn't much difference between the 70-300 and the 100-400 so why not have the extra 100mm?? I'm just curious??!

I apologise to you Pauline i misread the post please for give me sorry bad mistake...Ray