looking to buy one of these, worth the money?

whats the difference between an L series and normal lens?

i dont own this lens, but a friend of mine does, he uses it on a 300d, it is a great lens, the differences in my opinion, would be that it focuses a whole lot quicker than standard consumer lenses, and the overall picture quality and colours are way better.

it focuses the same as a usm lense.

best bang for ur buck is the 75 300 USM IS that casey and alot of them use.

same speed to focus

and they are 4.5 - 5.6 so still only half a stop difference.

sorry, i was comparing the focusing to a non usm lenses

Totaly agree with you dave completely right!!!!


L - stands for low distortion, so alot clearer less distortion in your pictures etc.


My 75-300mm is a great lense if you get it right the picture comes up a treat!!!!

most lenses are usm unless u get the bottom of the bottom of the range.

L is the professional series of lenses with a higher quality glass. however look at skidmans / caseys shots thye are with the 75 - 300 UMS IS

yes the bottom, agreed with dave, tyler, casey and skidmans photo's are great

yeah, might get both the L series and normal 70-300

thanks guys

dont waste the money mate, dave is completely right

just go straight to the 70-300 usm is. its a great lense i got mine for 980 a year ago almost on ebay, check it out im sure you could get one cheaper than that now.

tyler

70-300is ftw

hasnt let me down and produces a awesome image for its price

One of the few forums where the general consensus seems to swing toward the 70-300mm USM.

"L" lenses are the best of the best; they often feature constant aperture, faster AF and far better build quality. An obvious difference is the 70-200/4L is a white lens The 70-300 IS is the same price as the 70-200/4L and you'd have to be silly not to go for the L.

The build quality is far superior on the 70-200/4L, it balances alot nicer even on the smaller cameras and by all reports the contrast and sharpness are alot nicer. I recently sold my 70-200/4L and upgraded to the 70-200/2.8L IS - I'm yet to see a discernable difference in contrast and sharpness between the lenses (and the /2.8 IS is a top of the range $3k lens). Serves as testament to the quality of the L.

The 70-300 is f/5.6 on the long end, thats a whole stop slower than the 70-200/4L. Sure if you *need* the IS and the extra stop, otherwise the 70-200/4L will provide much clearer pictures.

ronza its dave - i think the L are great lenses but for the average user i think the 75 - 300 is more than enough. fair enough for ppl like yourself that uses it all the time / for a job. for the average jo blow the 75 - 300 has IS not sure if the f4 that you are talkin about for the same price has IS i know i love my IS and especially the mode 2 for panning that alot of lenses dont have.

kev as i have mentioned to u check out the 75 300 ill put money on it u wont be disapointed.

dave, im not sure there is a 75-300 is UMS lense. The 75-300 is the bottom of the bottom of the range but there is a 70-300 IS USM which skidman and tyler get great shots with.

yeah thats what i ment lol

your a boost photographer? you dont know what L series is????

i know the obvious differences...just not the technicals

ahhh k, well the technicals, have all been pointed out, so its up to you now

yeah, need a bigger lens real quick, so might just get the 75-300mm one and use that while i save for a better one

there was also a 75-300IS but it has been superceeded by the 70-300IS USM

70-200 f/2.8 IS

its a no brainer.... lightning quick autofocus and max apature, with razor sharp image quality and beautifull colors and bokeh....

its almost as good as the nikon version, which says alot!

70-200 f/2.8 IS
nice lense but 2.5k is a lot of dough

Sure is. Worth every cent though.
You get what u pay for. Go for a 70-300 IS, then if u find the shots arent sharp enough for what ur using them for (u would have to be doing some seriously big prints for that to be the case) then get a 70-200 f/2.8 L IS.

If you shop around i am sure it can be had much cheeper

$2.5k for a grey import in aus, for sure, thats what www.d-d-photographics.com are selling them for. Wont get much better, unless you go to ebay or B&H in america, a few hundred less but you will likely get slogged with GST by customs so it makes the difference toss all.

If there is a better price in australia I would love to know cos I am about to order one!

Who pays what is labeled? I know I never have.

http://nightgroove.com.au/product_info.php...;products_id=60

$2525. I bet you could get it for $2400 if you email asking for a price reduction. I got my 24-70 off this guy and he knocked $200 OFF his listed price on his shop, and i picked it up from his house!

hah i guess its worth asking aint it

he didnt knock off the canon rebate did he lance?

Nope, i got that =)

.. well will be getting that

Just checked the rebate site, appears they don't do it anymore, except for a few lines.

http://www.canon.com.au/cashbackoffer/index.html

Ill claim my 30D body right now thou

Is that the rebate offer from the USA? can you claim that in aus? hmm

Canon Aus

When was this? they dont have any lens rebates at the moment that i have seen, not since last year and you had to buy a body to get it (and i dont think the 24-70 was on it?)

Nah you could buy some of the top end lens and get rebates on them

Just the bodys at the moment thou

ahh
that explains it then

I will likely order mine thru www.d-d-photographics.com ... hopefully tomorrow (ooh its gone midnight so make that today! wooooo very excited!

Would be nice to get something to cover the 200-500 range, maybe some primes down the track but I doubt they will be large apeture (unless I strike it rich, or sell my car or something )

"L" stands for luxury.

The 70-200f4L kills the other canon telephoto zooms in the range that aren't L lenses - eg 75-300 etc etc

whats a good price for a 70-300 IS on Ebay ive seen them for $808 including postage.

im still trying to decide between 70-300 and the 70-200 F4 with no stabalizer for about $880

a similar price, is the image stabaliser worth the trade off for lower quality optics and a longer zoom

hey tjsports, i have a mate tryin to sell his 70-200mm f/4 Non IS for about that price, sharp as lens, picture that come out of it are mint, pm me if your interested

id still get the 75 300 is personally casey pete etc use them with IS for panning nice lense

depends if he wants IS? how much panning you going to be doing

from experience regardless IS is handy

oh no doubt it is, one day i will find that out

heres a rough price, i wouldnt buyit of them people though

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f...6QQcmdZViewItem

Very true my VR lense (nikon version) is great whether your panning or not it's extremly handy.

Agree, i love my IS lens. Dont use it for my sports shots thou shooting at 1/1200th is pointless.

70-300IS USM... its an awesome lens and produces a rather sharp image. u will be surprised!

i think Im set on getting the 70-300 lense now (thanks for everyones opinions)

So far $808 is the cheapest i can find it on ebay. Might bite the bullet and order it tomorrow


TD06 Why wouldnt you buy from them (Digital Rev)? I got my cannon 20D of them a year ago and was happy , I actually got a better memory card than what i paid for

shop locally, i bet you can do better than digital rev's price, remember when you go to shoping cart they add gst on.

Any one got any good local suppliers they like to use?


+ ebay doesnt have GST added - Digital Rev are cheaper on Ebay than their online store, Go Figure


From their websites most stores have this lense aroun $1000. 25% more than ebay. I suspect 20% off would be unlikley even with haggaling