Canon EF 70-300mm L Review
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 พ.ย. 2010
- froknowsphoto.com/canon-ef-70-...
Click here to see the full res sample images
Recently Canon USA sent me a T2i to play with along with the NEW Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM. As you will be able to tell from the video my first gut reaction is "WHAT" the price is $1599.99!!!! That is a lot of money for a F4-5.6 zoom lens. Keep in mind that the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS is $1899.99 USA.
Lets put price aside and talk about the lens and the type of images it creates. The lens is flat out amazing in terms of build quality, focus speed, sharpness, color and pretty much anything it does. It will have one draw back and that would be shooting in low light situations as well as indoors. There is only so much you can raise your ISO to compensate for the lack of the lens being a 2.8.
After using this lens for a few hours while photographing some soccer I came to really enjoy having such a long reach. The 300mm becomes a 480mm on the Canon T2i because of the 1.6x crop factor. To be able to fill the frame from across the filed is just incredible. It is even more incredible that the focus was fast, smooth and tack sharp. The lens did miss a few times but that is going to happen with any lens you use. The zoom ring is smooth and responsive though on occasions my palm would tweak the focus ring by accident.
What makes me end up giving this lens a good review was seeing the results in the computer. When I notice that the EXIF info showed me 266mm zoom and the player filed the frame with such clarity and sharpness I realized this was a killer lens.
There however are a few downsides to owning a mega zoom with a slow aperture. One major issue for me is not being able to blow out the background as well as a 2.8. I like the separate my subject from the background which makes my images go boom. Portrait and wedding photographers who purchase this lens will definitely miss the ability to blow out the background in their images. They will also find that this lens will be pretty useless in low light situations. The final downside is of course the price, at $1600 US I can not see a beginner purchasing this lens. I would not recommend this to someone just starting out as they could purchase 3 other "pro" lenses for the same price of this one. For example a Sigma 18-50 2.8, 70-200 2.8 version II sigma and Canon 50mm F1.4 all for around the same price.
Now that we know who this lens is not for lets look at who it is for. If you travel and are looking for one lens with huge reach to shoot only outdoors than this lens may be for you. This is not really a lens that a pro will end up buying to use professionally, they may use it for fun while away but they will also miss the F2.8. I see this being the perfect lens to take on a Safari as its small enough to hand hold all day but has a huge reach on the APS-C Canon sensors. It will be great for shooting Air Shows as well as out in nature. What it comes down to is if you have the money to spend and don't mind not having a F2.8 than this lens could be for you.
To see the full RES sample images captured with the Canon T2I and Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM please click the images below. All files were shot RAW not cropped and exported at the highest res jpeg out of Lightroom 3. Click here to see the full res images
froknowsphoto.com/canon-ef-70-...
![Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS ['Nano'] USM II lens review with samples (Full-frame and APS-C)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Iws0RqitJUc/mqdefault.jpg)
Watching this 12 years later! For people watching this because they consider buying this lens: you will not be disappointed. I agree with Jared, if you NEED the blown out backgrounds in all your shots when you photograph sports like in this video, this lens is not going to do that for you. But if you need the reach of the 300mm the f/2.8 version will set you back quite a lot more money. And this lens does blow out the background with an amazingly smooth bokeh when the background is far enough away from your subject!
I Have the 70-200mm f2.8 (version 1) and I love that lens and it's my go to for indoor. But this 70-300mm beats it (in my opinion) in sharpness, contrast and vibrancy and to me it's not even close as much as I like that 70-200mm. The pictures are amazing straight out of camera, it's one of my sharpest lenses and I take it out on hikes when I only want to have 1 lens with me that can get me all these different types of pictures. What is also a huge advantage of this lens is that you can focus at 1.2m at 300mm, which allows you to take very good close-up shots, I have gotten many good shots of insects with this lens. I bought mine years ago for 300$ because it was dropped very hard and was all messed up inside (outside didn't have a scratch!), but had it fixed for another 300 and saved a lot of money that way back then. It was amazing on my DSLR's but I notice I use it even more now with my R7. So if you're considering a used copy of this lens today in 2023 for a very reasonable price, knowing and accepting the limitations of the (variable) aperture, go get it. If you don't drop it from 2 stories high on a hard surface it will last you a lifetime, it is built like a tank.
Smelling it and saying its overpriced before you even use it? Lovely review
2019? And still FROKNOWSPHOTO!!!
I brought this lens about 8 months ago used, half priced and loving the results. This lens is a tank and it's heavy but the images are sharp.
@GrimsditchImages correct!!! And people love love that lens.
A quality built lens, sharp from corner to corner, good focal length, image-stabilized, and compact in size to easily carry in the camera bag.
@hcoll thats a good question, i think it was low down there in the zoom which isnt to good.
@flowremix That may just end up happening but a lot depends on the d7000 compared to the canon. I shot some of the Flyers warm up tonight with the t2i, it even gets 29 min continuos recording.
Dude your videos are sick man, straight to the point, and funny.
I got one of these canon lenses and I use it for Portraits/Fashion/Sports/Wild Life /Macro photography/ Video recordings and I had it for 6 years now and is a good lens to have and well built
thanks for the review am buying this lens this week for my mark3 and would be shooting alot of landscape videos and pictures ! cant wait to get this baby 70-300 L
@EpicsodeOne im not talking about black blur or anything im just talking about a 2.8 has more features that lead it to have better pictures than an f4 even with IS. They tend to be built better have better optics have more optics which means images shot at F4 will be better than images shot with the f4 lens.
first time i see a review! looks awesome!
@MellowSkateTeam good reasons for not using the lens hood this time around. I always use the lens hood just this time couldnt get marks on the hood so didnt want to risk it
I use this lens all the time now and after watching this review it was not the best choice back in the day. However now it is a perfect telephoto lens to use as it is much cheaper and still performs well.
I would like to see how it compares with the canon 300mm f4 L prime
Ive been using it for landscape, Not an issue at F11, super sharp
@rinceresource I will have to get my hands on that to test out.
@wilbertcs both of those lenses yes as long as they are on the pro end bodies. On the lower end body def the 70-200
Go to 15:11. He will tell you about information without yelling about price to much.
Thank you Jared for making that clear, I am really fed up with a lot of people arguing about brands when really, its all about the quality and creativity of the photo.
I don't think most people will miss the tripod collar.
I tested it with my old T3 (super lightweight) on a Manfrotto Befree tripod, lens hood on, zoomed to 300. Tripod legs were fully extended and centre column was up. Still seemed reasonably stable, and that's the worst case scenario I could think of (apart from using a sketchy cheapo tripod). Might not trust that set up on a very windy day, but I also wouldn't have the tripod maxed out in that case).
The lens has a smaller barrel than the ones that come with a collar, and the extending portion is plastic, so while it's heavy, it's fairly balanced.
@jpoloh I know I noticed that I cut about 20 more out of there lol.
@woohoodoh your right, but this is a small small market. I really liked the results I got and it is a very tempting lens. I bet the paps will like it eh.
Great review. Like seeing the photos in Lightroom after the shoot. Glad I got the 70-200L2. f5.6 really is unjustifiable at that price point.
He is the only reviewer that is honest. Thanks Jared.
@EpicsodeOne Yes I shoot Nikon but even if I was shooting with Canon which I have a body and L glass on the way I would not buy this lens for one or any other F4 lens. There is a major difference between F4 with IS and a 2.8. Just because you have IS doesnt mean that its equivalent to a 2.8.
Дилетанты от фотографии не должны делать такие видео.
Thank you for posting this.
@meinDummerNutzername i would go with the 2.8 over both for the same price.
Awsome shooting
Do you think that if we use Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L (non IS) with a 2x teleconverter will be better than this 70-300 ?
The 70-200 weighs 3 lbs. This 70-300 weighs 2 lbs. This lens is much shorter, which means it can fit into more bags while still mounted to the camera. The lens is better suited for landscape photography, and larger wildlife, than sports photography.
BTW, he mentions Nikon has a similar 70-300 for $500 USD. He fails to mention that the Nikon is not weather sealed, and that Canon had a similarly priced 70-300, which is not weather sealed, either. Nikon did not offer a weather sealed 70-300, and still doesn’t.
Great video, well made and very informative. It was indeed helpful when I was deciding whether to buy this lens or not, which I finally did, in 2015, a great decision. I like the photo examples used and the analysis, they perfectly show what this optical jewel is capable of. I also like that you make a clear, well-founded and fair analytical balance on the lens, with its main pros and cons. I agree in that price is the main negative thing, but let's not forget that this is an L lens with a great reach, and that means top quality. Likewise, I can confirm, after using it for a few years now, that this lens is totally worth it, with a superb and outstanding image quality and sharpness, absolutely fantastic, mainly in outdoors photography in decent or good light, but it is not bad at all in bad light either. Yes, it is not an f/2.8, which by the way would cost an insane amount of money if ever built in this zoom range, but man, those extra 100mm (in relation to the 70-200 f/2.8) are very, very usable. In addition, the 70-300mm L is very easy to fit in a bag and it can be carried around all day without breaking your neck or your shoulder, unlike with the 70-200mm f/2.8 or the 100-400mm, which is a big plus. Of course the 70-200mm f/2.8 wins and beats the 70-300mm L in some specific conditions or situations, such as indoors, low light, portraits and bokeh, as you well argue in the video, but for other purposes I so much prefer the 70-300mm L. Each lens has its pros and cons, if only the perfect lens existed... The conclusion is obvious… you can’t have it all!. :)
How's your 70-300L, still use it ?
is it still great today ?
@@vinvanid Hi there. Yes, I still use it and it is still great. The optics, sharpness, colours, materials, ect, are superb, of the highest quality. Very happy with my 70-300L. The Canon 70-300L lens is the best 70-300 lens, I believe. I also use it for macro and long exposure night photography, not only as a zoom lens. Size is great as well, not too bulky. It is an awesome lens. :)
@@Arlantix Wow, still the best !
Thank you for your info, God bless 🙏
@schumionbike I shoot at 1/4000 or 1/6400 someitmes when i am at 200 IS and shooting at 2.8. Shutter speed doesnt effect the quality.
please do more like this for other Canon lens. exactly like this just different lens. great vid.
Thanks or the video..is canon 70-200 f-2.8 is mark2 +1.4x combination gives you same sharper image or lower?
@mikenyesi123 not for my stills, but the video in the t2i is pretty impressive.
Thanks for sharing! How is the image quality compared to EF28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM?
@Pugyxandrew that is a blue yeti.
I tried out this lens & hope Canon will come out with a Mk II with the Zoom Ring & Focus Ring reversed. I never use Manuel Focus. I would prefer the Zoom ring closer to the camera body. I opted for the 70-200 F4 L for now.
@estudio100rafa I have all the nikon glass myself and I will be making full reviews very soon!!!!
seams like a fine lens. which glas is the equivalent to this lens in the Nikon world? may u know. thx
What are the 3 lenses you would suggest that are better than this lens? You mentioned it several times and I'd be interested in hearing what those are.
what lesn would you recommend for an amature for wild life photos? i have a canon f4.5 75-300mm telephoto lens that came with my canon d1300 also came with a 18-55mm f5.6 i think, so yea what would you recommend to me ? on a seriously tight budget but would save for the right lens
3 lenses for beginners? Which ones?
If i am using 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM lens with extender 2x iii, then how much maximum aperture will I get as I heard extender effects the aperture of lens?
I think this is intended more for the shooters who shoot the 100-400L because of the similar apertures and design elements. Canon already has 4 versions of the 70-200 so I don't think they were targeting that segment.
What are the other 3 that you recommend for for less than 1600?..i need zoom and 1.4 lenses..thanks
get primes if you want 1.4
I have had this for almost a decade. My reason for buying it over the 70-200, was that I wanted to do a lot of outdoor shooting and the 200mm wasn't enough reach. I put this on my 7D and it is fantastic for nature shots. Yeah, I wish it was a wider aperature, but..... As for the price, have you seen what the RF lenses are going for?????
Lol glad I'm not the only one watching 9 year old fro videos. Lol. BTW, just bought one for $600 brand new from Amazon. Are they any good?
@@southerncharity7928 Sure happy with mine. Nice and sharp and the IS works great!
@@southerncharity7928 The L version still runs $1350 new, used about $1000
@@sedward1261 I got the L version. from Amazon. it was 600 US bucks - unreal right?! Probably a misprice. I see they normally sell like U say on eBay.
@@southerncharity7928 yes that's a steal if in decent condition.
Have you ever tried using the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens on a 60D or even a rebel series body?I bet you still get great images.
Great video, and love the style of the presentation. I agree that the 5.6 doesn't separate the background as much a you would want, but my question is whether there is any post processing that can produce a similar and realistic effect?
I have to say though, that I have this lens and the sharpness and extra reach it provides is worth the trade off with depth of field :-)
i know I'm pretty randomly asking but do anyone know a good site to stream newly released series online ?
9:45 is that 70-300mm ? its awesome background blur... can i get same result with nikon d5300 ? with same lense ?
I would really like to see how this stacks up against the EF 70-300mm f/3-5.6 IS USM and the EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 DO IS USM. Interested to see what the difference in price offers.
hi jared. was wondering if you could make a review on the Nikon's 80-200 f2.8. was thinking of getting it instead of the 70-200, only because it is lower in price. thank you for your videos, very informative. More Power!
I know this video is 9 years old, but I have this lens personally and I own it because it is way superior to the slightly smaller 70-300 DO which I used to have and this lens is heavy but SUPER short in length when zoomed to 70. It's literally half the size of the 70-200 2.8 L so it takes up very little space in my bag :) Jared you didn't really emphasize the size much and that is the real "big deal": with this lens. Optically it is razor sharp and the IS is bullet proof!
What about the collar to put it on a POD racer? I'm sure Fro Vader would enjoy that!
You can pick up a used one online, mint condition for about $600 now. Awesome zoom lens! Using for High School track and field and Cross Country races. The Crop sensor giving me 484mm saves me a LOT of leg work at the events, Great review, thanks!
Sometimes they are in the $400s/$500s now which is a STEAL, no reason for the 70-300 is ii which is similarly priced when the L is right here
@fotografjura90 i dont own one and got my hands on this one to play with for a little.
I got this lens in like new condition for 650 Euro. Been using it for wildlife and general shooting and all I can say is that its great on my 90D. Images are sharp and vibrant, focus is fast and accurate , IS works superb and its short stubby shape is easy packing.
9 years ago? I'm searching Affordable Lens for Canon R6. Would you recommend this?
I would recommend it if you have the money or you do photography as a job where you need a compact telephoto lens or need a sharp high quality lens that performs really good. I think this lens really shines in full frame sensor cameras. Crop sensor cameras are good too.
So I would like to know those three lenses that you'll recommend for beginners.
Your videos are very cool man.. very imformative!.. even if im a canon guy.. but still i like your vids!
So if i was going to get the $500 lens from nikkon how much would the adapter be for my canon t2i? Or is this possible?
I've got the 55-250IS and I can say its very good given its price. I think shooting sports would be fine with it as long as its a bright sunny day since the max aperature at 250mm is 5.6. Just be aware that its an EFS mount so it wont fit a full frame like the 5D series down the road.
I think Canon is just sticking a red ring on random lenses and painting them white in order to overcharge consumers. Optically it cannot possibly be four time better than the non-L version to justify its price. Nikon has got it right in the sense that the only variable aperture gold ring-ed lens is the 80-400, which is an awesome lens.
Certainly for sports this lens has some significant drawbacks, but for someone like myself who shoots wildlife more than anything else f5.6 really isn't an issue, I'm stopping down to f6-7 anyhow so it's all about what you want out of a lens. And for me, fast focus, sharp images and versatility are what matter. I agree it'd be nice if it was at least a constant f4, but i think it certainly has it's place in the market.
I wonder how much the lens is?
When you said that you would recommend 3 other lenses for beginners, what are those 3?
@carlallenpetty nope, thats the fro knows photo t shirt.
@billdowis i was the guy with the hair shooting with a canon and recording video with the nikon and no one said a word.
Hey i have a question:
I dont have a tripod, so is it worth choosing the 70-200mm L lens without IS over 70-300 USM with IS?
is there any chance we could get a list of the infamous three lenses?
thats it, im coming into the store with some cordless clippers. watch ya back
its made for fullframe, why testing it on a crop? background would blur more right?
Hello Jared Polin!!.
I have a question.
Canon 55-250 mm IS STM lens or, Canon 70-300 mm IS USM lens??. Which is better?. I want to purchase a new lens and want to jump from 18-55mm kit lens. Help please!!😊
5.6 isn't so bad outdoors up until late in the afternoon (California, summer season), this lens isn't meant to be used in-doors anyway. The only issue is lack of blur.
Personally Im torn between the 70-200 f/4 is or the 70-300 f/4-5.6L. Photography is my hobby not my career so I would love to get a 70-200 f/2.8 ii but the price after taxes is gonna cost me over $1000 more than these other two and the size of that lens is also hassle. I think I'd be better off with the 70-300L and a 50 f1.8 or f1.4 for indoors if I ever needed it. Inside a house with lights on f/4 is usually enough for a decent image anyways. especially with a high quality L lens with IS.
All grammar and spelling aside, I think he justified the reason why he did a review. It's being talked about as a great lens by many people. It is obviously way overpriced for what it is. If it's possible for you, go out and borrow/rent the 70-200 f2.8 and then this lens and see how you feel. When the price is almost the same you will think differently. If you think, "Oh, I wish I had more reach!" Then grab a teleconverter
Thanks Jared! I would totally save up more money and get the 70 - 200mm f/2.8
The 70-300 f4-5.6L IS is nearly 500g lighter than the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. Then if you add another 250g for the 2x teleconverter the 70-300 is roughly 750g lighter. That is ALOT when Trekking and Back-packing.The 70-300 also packs up much smaller and is still sharper at the 300 end.
In Australia the costs are roughly $1500 vs $3000 (for both tele-converter and 70-200 lens).
Yes, the 70-200 is a "better" lens in its range but its twice the price (atleast in Australia) and a decent amount heavier and more bulky.
Thoughts?
@TotalBizcut i do not use them personally.
Can u do a review on the canon lens 28-300 mm.
you mentioned 3 prime lenses you could get for the same money... with a 2.8 blend..
which lenses were you talking about?:)
thanks for the great review!
how's the IS noise on the 70-300 while filming?
i saw a video of the 70-200 f4...and the noise of the constant IS was very disturbing, if you wanna keep the cam-recorded sound!
that lens fits on the t2i? ...i have that kit.. lens just broke recently i would love new gear
what kind of lavalier setup are you using? i don't see your transmitter on your belt.
If you could get this lens used, good copy, for $400, or the 400 f/5.6 for $500, which would you recommend? - sports shooter. Already have a 70-200
@Mrsvaughan61 See i never agree with that f4 is sharper thing, i just use the glass and its amazing honestly, the 2,8 in my mind is the way to go.
Hi I just got the T2i and I plan on shooting video with a film look. I was woundering. With the kit lense that comes with my camera is zooming to 22mm going to give me the same look as a 35mm due to the 1.6 crop factor.
70-200mm f/2.8L mkii lack the distance of course but what if you add the extender X2? It will comes to 400mm at f/5.8 or f/6 which I can't remember... it just comes to be the same.
Please by all means upload your review for all of us to critique.
thanks,
hey fro! what (three) lenses would you advice instead of getting that then?
Hey Jared awesome video... I'm looking to get a Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM non-L that is pretty soon and here it goes for about £400-£500. Son far i have the standard kit and the 50mm 1.8 so i'm still a beginner. What do you think?
How much was it again?
FrontSideBus 16 hundred dollars! LOL! ^_^ it's as if Jared could not say it enough eh.... ^_^ Cheers!
what kind of camera do you recommend for a first time photographer?
@amr276 never tested that one.
@JackassFlyer glad!!!
What are the other three lenses you were talking about
Hi I just got the T2i and I plan on shooting video with a film look. I was woundering. With the kit lense that comes with my camera is zooming to 22mm going to give me the same look as a 35mm due to the 1.6 crop factor. By the way very nice lense.
Hey jared, i'm new to photography and i'm going to buy a canon 60d so which lenses do you refer to me to start with???
Thank you.
i wish wvery unboxer would smell the stuff like you just did. thats the first thing i do