Reddit reviews Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras
We found 24 Reddit comments about Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
70-300mm telephoto zoom lens with f/4.5-5.6 maximum aperture for Canon EOS SLR cameras3-stop Image Stabilizer for reducing camera shake; ring-type ultra-sonic monitor (USM), Macro Focus Range : 1.50 mElectro-magnetic diaphragm (EMD) helps create attractive background at large aperturesSuper Spectra lens coating and lens element shaping suppresses flare and ghosting,Filter Thread: 58 mmSuitable for Nature/concert/potrait and close up/product photography. Measures 3 inches in diameter and 5.6 inches long; weighs 22.2 ounces; 1-year warranty
Assuming by "wildlife" you mean animals/birds at a distance...
Bob Atkins' website has a section listing the best EOS lenses under $400, which includes the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 IS. He personally recommends the Tamron 70-300/4-5.6 Di VC, and there's used examples of the latter on Amazon for $280.
You can also find used examples of the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS for $300, the (discontinued) Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 for about $200, and the (discontinued) Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 for $100.
Of all those, I'd recommend the Tamron 70-300 myself, although if money is really tight and you can do without image stabilization, the Canon 100-300 seems to be a bit of a bargain (both Bryan Carnathan and Ken Rockwell give it a decent review).
Note: I'm only using Amazon for price-consistency. Check Craigslist, your local classifieds, and other outlets at your leisure.
This lens?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B0007Y794O/ref=sr_1_2_olp?ie=UTF8&qid=1464935877&sr=8-2&keywords=70+300+canon&condition=used
Its 450 brand new....
Thank you. :) I love aviation photography; this year I wasn't able to go to any, due to the sequester grounding The Blue Angels, The Thunderbirds and all other military demo teams. Hopefully next year will be better.
I was sitting in the media section... my membership at an aviation photography website gets me media passes to this airshow, and that gets me right up to the edge of the crowdline with no one in front of me. Here's a picture showing how close I was able to get.
The T-6 Texan and the F-18 were shot with the Canon 400mm F/5.6 L-series prime lens, and the F-4 was shot with the Canon 70-300 F/4-F/5.6 telephoto.
That depends, I'm generally sort of hesitant about used bodies because I don't always know what to look for to check and see if it's in all working order. I know people here often say to get them, it's a matter of comfort I think.
You could get a new t2i or t3i from amazon for around 700 bucks, with a lens that would be ok for most stuff. They aren't the most durable cameras, but they take great pictures and are cheap.
For lenses, you could get a 70-300 is usm which will give you a nice range for animals and large birds. That looks to be about 500 bucks.
The lens that comes with the camera and that one should cover most of what you will want.
My 2 cents as a long time hobby photographer with somewhat similar interests (I shoot nature, at macro and telephoto distances).
Just about any modern DSLR body will be able to do what you are asking for, but you will need very different lenses for both purposes.
Sensor size is the main factor to consider in modern DSLRs.
Full Frame bodies have a sensor inside that is equal in size to one frame of a photographic film. APS-C or crop bodies have a sensor that is smaller than photographic film, therefore you have a "crop factor" (1.5 or 1.6) which represents the part of the image produced by the lens that is captured by the sensor. In effect, this is equivalent to cropping out the edges from a full frame image. Micro four thirds is a sensor standard that is roughly half the size of a full frame sensor and cameras featuring this standard are very compact (this is related to flange distance [distance from sensor to the lens], not sensor size, but that is not important here). Pentax, Canon, Nikon and Sony make both full frame and APS-C bodies, Fuji makes APS-C bodies and Olympus & Panasonic make M4/3 bodies. I'll stick to Canon and Nikon in my recommendations here because other manufacturers are not well represented in India.
Macro
There are 4 ways to shoot macro images;
(i) The easiest way is to use a dedicated macro lens. These are lenses optimised to focus at very close distances. A "true" macro lens produces 1:1 or life-size images. What this means is that at the closest focusing distance, an object the size of the sensor will produce an image that fills the complete image frame. The Nikon 60, 105 and 200mm, the Canon 100 and 180mm, the Tamron 90mm, Tokina 100mm, Sigma 105 & 150mm are all excellent lenses. These are all moderately to very expensive, so I recommend looking in the used camera market. Most macro photography is done with manual focus, so you may be better off purchasing an older manual focus lens for 8-15k, than a newer auto focus model for 20k and up.
Pros: Excellent image quality, lenses are all built to high standards.
Cons: Cost.
(ii) Reverse mounting a zoom lens. The use of an adapter allows you to attach a lens (such as a standard 18-55 kit lens) the wrong way around and take magnified images.
Pros: Inexpensive.
Cons: Learning curve, lot of trial and error. Image quality not as good as a dedicated macro lens.
(iii) High quality close-up diopters (such as a Raynox DCR-250, Canon 250/500D, Nikon 4/6T) can be attached to the front of just about any lens to provide magnified images. You can also get cheap "close up lenses", but these will provide poor image quality. The diopters mentioned above are doublet or triplet (made of 2 or 3 lenses) assemblies that will not affect image quality to a great extent.
Pros: Pocket friendly.
Cons: None really, unless you want to nitpick.
(iv) Extension tubes are hollow tubes you place between the lens and body which magnify the image produced by the lens thanks to simple physics.
Pros: Inexpensive.
Cons: Take a bit of getting used to.
Sports
Taking pictures of fast moving objects at distances requires the use of long "telephoto" lenses. I would recommend a 300mm lens as the very minimum if you want to take pictures at cricket distances (assuming you're sitting in the stands of a stadium and trying to photograph the batsman). As telephoto prime lenses are rather large, heavy and expensive, you're better off going with a zoom lens right now.
Keeping your budget in mind, the best deal right now might be the Nikon D5300+18-55+70-300 for 48,000. The 70-300 AF-P is a pretty good lens that focuses down to about 2 feet and gives you a magnification of 1:4. Add a Raynox DCR-250 for about 7k and you have a pretty nifty macro set-up that will do a decent job with sports as well.
If you want something a bit more rugged, I'd suggest a used Nikon D7100 for about 25,000 coupled with the 70-300 AF-P for 17,000. A Raynox diopter and an 18-55 will add 10,000 to the cost.
The Canon equivalent of the AF-P 70-300 costs 36,000 (although the 55-250 can be had at that price), unfortunately. Which does not leave much for a body. There is an inexpensive Canon 70-300, along with Tamron/Tokina/Sigma variants in both Canon & Nikon mounts, however none of them offer Vibration Reduction (which the AF-P does). VR corrects for "lens shakiness" and is quite useful for beginners. Entry level Canon bodies also offer a somewhat less featured auto focus implementation compared to nikon.
If you want to go with Canon, I'd recommend the 750D+18-55 combo for 47,000 combined with the 55-250 IS for 12,000. Or, you could go with a used 7D (a 10 year old body, but still quite capable) for about 32,000 and couple it with the 55-250.
There are additional options if you'd like to restrict yourself to one form of photography. You'll also get lots of useful information if you ask this question on the photography & camera sub-reddits, as well as Indian photography focused sites such as the JJ Mehta forums.
Very happy.
And my jackpot, after almost buying the last 2016 Razer Blade, I discovered this. Current price is $1799.00. Granted this is a warehouse item, but I suspect that just means it was opened and maybe briefly used, it says it will be repackaged, not sure if that means by MSI or in aftermarket packaging, ETA 7/19
I would buy 7DII over a 6D in a heartbeat hands down more versatile. But I encourage you to buy an older camera since you're just starting out the
BUY THIS 7D with a low shutter count only $600. Still a hell of a camera to start with, lenses are more important.
Canon 10-18mm lens $300
Canon 50mm f/1.8 $120
Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 $650 OR buy a 70-200mm f/4 IS L lens USED off FredMiranda, or buy a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkI L USED off FredMiranda I got my f/2.8L mkI for $1,300 last year the MKII goes for $1,900 or so used but wasn't worth the $600 for me.
Card reader $18
Then get some Sandisk 16gb or 32gb cards
___
Other stuff to think about:
Canon 85mm f/1.8 $360
$130 Flash
Tripod $200
Canon 50mm f/1.4
---
Big purchases way down the road
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS mkII L $2,200
A 300mm f/2.8 or even f/4 wouldn't be a bad thing to shoot for either if you really want to do wildlife but not spend over $6,000 on a lens
Canon 1.4 teleconverter $500 this only works with L lenses buy this way down the road if you need more reach.
Canon 16-35mm or 17-40mm L lens
I have a $650 lens. But that's just a "maybe someday" thing.
I will get the $350 guide telescope and autoguider camera combo someday and soon.
I'm shooting on the cheap and used this throughout the weekend.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-300mm-4-5-6-Lens-Cameras/dp/B0007Y794O
i took this image of the moon with the 70-300mm f5.6. I've also found the kit lens to be quite a good walking around lens.
Sooo,
I have had a T3i for a few years now along side a this:
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-300mm-4-5-6-Lens-Cameras/dp/B0007Y794O/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1398346452&sr=8-2&keywords=usm+300+canon
and also this:
http://www.amazon.com/Rokinon-FE14M-C-Ultra-Canon-Black/dp/B003VSGQPG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1398346666&sr=8-1&keywords=wide+14+mm+canon
I don't know exactly why, but I can definitely take really superb pictures with with the 300mm lens... and also quite good ones with the Rokinon one...
The kit lens takes normal or average pictures...
My only assumptions are that the kit lens is made with lower quality stuff or is someone less powerful... The 300mm lens is "made in japan" so I guess it is higher quality...
Anyway, all this has been said only to ask suggestions on higher quality lenses to take closer up pictures. For example, with the 300mm lens I can get really cool blurring effects and sometimes bokeh... but the close up lense is just meh.....
I don't want to break the bank getting another lens either, so maybe you can help me finding a standard zoom lens or a prime lense that is for close ups that will be better than my current kit lens... If you think I can find a good deal on this used, you can let me know..
Thank you
> Hey guys, I am posting this on behalf of my sister who is too stubborn to make a reddit account.
tell your sister that in order to give proper advice, we really require her presence, because:
> As a new photographer, how much should she charge for prom pictures?
this is kind of a hard question to answer. as a new photographer, and with some questions like these, i'm inclined to answer that she shouldn't be doing it at all. every pro has to start somewhere, granted, but there should generally be something of a gap between "picking up a camera" and "starting a professional career in photography". that gap allows for practice, experience, skills, knowledge and personal style develop, and gives you exposure to what real paying jobs can be like, as you kind of progress up the ladder of job legitimacy.
frankly, i doubt i could do a similar job that cheap at cost. gas to the job costs money. prints and CDs cost money.
> She has a canon T2I with various lenses.
so... what lenses?
frankly, this is an amateur camera from three generations ago. it's not really a professional tool. you may not need it for what she's trying to do, but there are definite reasons that professionals use professional tools and not just the cheapest thing that gets the job done.
> What is the best mode for taking pictures in the outdoors(for prom pictures)? She believes it is portrait but is a bit unsure.
if you're using the scene modes, you're doing it wrong. who knows how those things work? why the make the choices they make. if you're taking pictures for pay, you'd better know why you camera is set the way it's set, and not leave those choices up to some program in its firmware that's trying to guess what you're taking a picture of.
you want to, at the very least, be in a priority mode (probably aperture), or even manual. you want to decide what exposure setting is more important and set that, even if you let the camera set everything else accordingly.
> What is the best website/store for purchasing prints? We are thinking costco will be the cheapest
costco definitely makes pretty good prints for a fast turnaround. for websites, i like adoramapix.
> Which lens would be better for an outdoor prom picture shoot? http://www.amazon.com/Canon-18-55mm-3-5-5-6-Select-Digital/dp/B0002Y5WXY or http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-70-300mm-4-5-6-USM/dp/B0007Y794O
this is one of those kind of things you should know before taking jobs professionally. the answer is "you should probably have a 17-55 (or 24-70 on full frame) and a 70-200, and not these junky kit zooms." truthfully, there isn't a right answer to this: i have and will continue to shoot groups with telephoto lenses. it's a mater of what you're shooting and how you want to shoot it.
> Can anyone provide a link for learning how to calibrate the Canon T2I ISO settings for outdoor pictures?
again, this is the kind of thing you should know before taking pay for jobs. and it depends on the light.
I bought this camera two years ago and have loved it. Feel free to ask me any questions about it.
Lowest price the 60D has ever been, probably because of the recent release of its successor, the 70D. Check out this page for more information on the lens bundle deals
If you already own the Sigma 18-35, then chances are you own a speedbooster. If that's the case stick with EF glass.
If you need a telephoto option and don't want to go beyond $500, I'd consider going with this Canon lens instead.
If you need a diverse lens that offers wide angle in addition to a slight telephoto option, I'd purchase this lens.
If you are looking for a compromise and dont want to shell out for the L glass check out the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. I have this lens and its great for what it is. Sure its not an L lens but its does the job and I dont regret getting it.
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
That shot might be challenging since I don't have a 400mm and we're playing one of the better schools in the state (and we're not exactly known for football), so the amount of times we'll be near the endzone will be limited. I guess I could take the shot while the other team is about to score, but it wouldn't put that in the yearbook (possibly my portfolio though!).
Canon actually has a non-L 70-300. None of those photos are at 300mm, but this one from my paintball set is. The trick to getting good photos at 300mm is to stop down (which is why a bunch of the football ones are at f/8, just in case I had to zoom) and to not display your photos too big :) I'll put up/PM you a photo at 300mm when I get a chance.
This really depends on what you shoot.
Have you found that you need more range? Do you need a longer focal length? What exactly are you shooting in nature/outdoor? If you're trying to take animal photos, then yes, get some extra length.
Personally, I'd be getting this lens if I were shooting Canon and a spare $1000. But that's just because it suits my style more. It is a faster lens, so you'd be able to shoot in less light, and has a very "normal" focal length range. I don't typically take photos of things/people that are far away, I prefer to get up close and take more intimate photos, rather than stalker photos from across the street.
But if you want to shoot birds and animals, or sports, the 55-250mm mark II is nice, it is cheap, and lightweight for what it does. There is also a 70-300mm, which is almost double the price, and almost double the weight, for 20% more reach.
Also; I would recommend buying lenses, rather than upgrading your body... the t2i is only 1.5 years old. You will see more of an improvement from buying lenses than camera bodies, and lenses can be used on future bodies.. whereas if you replace your camera body every 2 years, you're losing your investment every 2 years.
p.s. Don't be afraid to look at sigma lenses they're usually 95% of the quality, for 50% of the price.
P.p.s. These links that I've added contain an amazon affiliate tag, but please don't feel compelled to buy using them, you should check ebay, keh, b&h, adorama, or even your local shops etc. for the best deal. The mods have yet to decide what to do with any money that the amazon affiliate tag raises for the reddit community.
P.p.p.s. There are no solid guarantees in place that I won't backstab the reddit community and steal the $35 currently in the reddit amazon affiliate account! Well, no guarantee besides my word. (I promise not to do it.) (I'm just pointing out that anonymous reddit accounts shouldn't really be trusted..)
You are probably the most helpful person I have ever encountered on the internet. Thank you so much for taking the time to respond with such eloquence and clarity! It is a graduation gift, and due to some hinting about a camera store sale this weekend I think I may be ending up with a t3i. I will check out the Canon loyalty program just in case.
I would love a 100-400mm, but it looks like that lens starts at about $1400, which will be out of my price range for likely a few years. What do you think of this 70-300 mm with f 4-5.6 and image stabilitation? That would be reasonable for me to save up to.
Thank you again for being so helpful!
Also, what is your opinion of tele-converters?
That would give you an advantage! 😃
I would recommend either the 70-300mm or 55-200mm. There's a price difference of course, but both great choices. Naturally a benefit of having an extra 100mm. Though make sure to get the lens with IS because it will make a difference. They do sell a 70-300mm lens without IS but I'd avoid.
https://www.amazon.ca/Canon-70-300mm-4-5-6-Lens-Cameras/dp/B0007Y794O
https://www.amazon.ca/Canon-55-250mm-Telephoto-Stabilized-2044B002/dp/B0011NVMO8
Currently I have:
Thanks
This lens
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-300mm-4-5-6-Lens-Cameras/dp/B0007Y794O
With this camera
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Digital-18-135mm-3-5-5-6-Standard/dp/B004MN00C4/ref=sr_1_18?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1407159289&sr=1-18&keywords=canon+eos+rebel+t3i
What telephoto, Canon EF lens would you suggest? New, or lightly used is ok too. It doesn't have to be a Canon brand. I'd like to stay as far below $1,000 as I can. I don't care much about what the lower focal length is as I have other lenses that cover those, but I'd like the upper length from 200-300mm. This is going on a 6D.
I'm debating between the Canon 70-300 IS USM, the Canon 70-200 L, or the Tamron 70-300. Should I stay away from any of these, or is there another one to consider?
Thanks!