Canon 70-300 IS Samples

Hi,

Perhaps you had one of the original 70-300's... the ones with the portrait orientation fault? This has been acknowledged by Canon as a fault and has now been resolved. If I remember correctly, the serial number needs to contain a '2' or more in the third position - mine has a '5'.

I would seriously consider buying/trying another but of course it's your choice. Perhaps you could test in-store? I've seen too many great photos with this lens at 300 to believe it has an inherent softness problem.

Cheers
Bart

Hi,

Thanks.

Good question! That's something I haven't posted yet.

I use a Canon 350D / XT which I really enjoy.

Cheers
Bart

bkb76 said:

Regarding the lowest shutter speed at 300... well to be honest I
don't know yet. I've only just bought the lens recently and haven't
really had a chance to play with it that much. Though I have heard
of people taking 'acceptable' shots at 1/15sec. Though I'm sure
'acceptable' would be subjective and I wouldn't recommend going that
slow. And I guess it also depends on you perception of sharp...
shots not viewed at 100% can seem pretty sharp... but if viewed at
100%...

Click to expand...

there is a great deal of really fantastic romanesque (and PAINTED too)
capitals at St. Germain des Pres here - however, there is a problem, or
even too actually: [a] no tripods are allowed, even if one
goes for such a barbarity as using flash on these, it would be to no
avail as colors will get flatten, harsh, garish even;

so, my solution was twofold:

• using SMC Tak 50/1.4 in avialable light - sort of worked;

• but as I wanted them to be as much frame fitting as possible, the

next best thing was 70-300IS @ 300. fully open, ISO pushed to 6400,
which resulted in shutter speeds as low as 1/6 (my head braced against
an opposite column, legs apart and stable, and a lot of breathing
exercises too )

my next approach planned is to use 300/4L IS - should be possible, however,
with it's weight about twice heavier, one can not be sure without trying,

FWIW,
jpr2

StrykeBack said:

the colors in your photos are really great. Plus they seem plenty
sharp. I keep reading people sayin the lense past 200 isn't sharp so
just go with a 70-200 L but i really want that range.

Click to expand...

I think you confuse the (new) 70-300 IS USM with the old model it replaced, the 75-300 IS USM. That one really had sharpness problems above 200.
The new one should be a big step forward.

In my experience this lens is clearly softer at 300 than at 200 (both wide open). It improves at f8, which is the f-stops used in the most of the samples by the OP. I sent the lens to Canon to see if they could better calibrate it, but it was the same when returned. For me this lens is a pretty good 70-200 with a decent 300 f8 and a 300 f5.6 that you can still use in smaller prints. All this, together with IS is a good value but probably not the best you can buy if cost is not an issue.

The MTF charts at:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70300_456is/index.htm

are in line with my experience.

goldbean said:

Great shots! Seeing shots like these makes me think I got a bum
70-300. Mine was amazing from about 70-200 but really soft at 300.
I tried and tried to make myself think the output at 300 was
acceptable, but I just couldn't do it.

Now I'm trying to decide among a 70-200 f/4 non-IS, a refurb 70-200
f/4 IS (maybe out of my price range), or another copy of the 70-300
IS. Tough decisions...

Click to expand...

Thanks for your input. I actually checked my SN to see if I had one of the original copies (with the portrait issue), but I didn't.

It might be worth trying another copy, though.

bkb76 said:

Hi,

Perhaps you had one of the original 70-300's... the ones with the
portrait orientation fault? This has been acknowledged by Canon as a
fault and has now been resolved. If I remember correctly, the serial
number needs to contain a '2' or more in the third position - mine
has a '5'.

I would seriously consider buying/trying another but of course it's
your choice. Perhaps you could test in-store? I've seen too many
great photos with this lens at 300 to believe it has an inherent
softness problem.

Cheers
Bart

Click to expand...

Thanks for your input. I really tried to shoot at f/8 at 300 whenever I could; even there, it still seemed soft (and there was only a minor improvement, if any, when I DxOed images).

Honestly, cost is an issue, which is why I'm spending some time deciding what to do. Your description of IQ at 300 does a great job framing the dilemma for me. If I could get shots at 300 that were sharp at 8x10 (even if most were at f/8), I'd be satisfied, but I couldn't get that from my first copy.

This may be a dumb question, but...I had my first copy of the 70-300 before I got my 40D, so I used it exclusively on my 300D. Will the lens perform better on a 40D? (I'm interested in the broader question, too, I guess: Is the lens the limiting factor in sharpness, or is it the sensor?)

sssanti said:

The MTF charts at:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70300_456is/index.htm

are in line with my experience.

goldbean said:

Great shots! Seeing shots like these makes me think I got a bum
70-300. Mine was amazing from about 70-200 but really soft at 300.
I tried and tried to make myself think the output at 300 was
acceptable, but I just couldn't do it.

Now I'm trying to decide among a 70-200 f/4 non-IS, a refurb 70-200
f/4 IS (maybe out of my price range), or another copy of the 70-300
IS. Tough decisions...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

If you don't get good results with relatively small prints, the lens is likely to be the limiting factor. This is assuming that the camera focuses correctly, that you avoid motion blur and that you apply some reasonable sharpening either in camera or during post-processing. On the other hand, if you look at files with 100% magnification, the 10 MP file will have 1.3 times the magnification of a 6 MP file and you could get the feeling that the lens is less sharp with the 40D. For the same print size, say 8x10, the result from both cameras should be the same.

goldbean said:

This may be a dumb question, but...I had my first copy of the 70-300
before I got my 40D, so I used it exclusively on my 300D. Will the
lens perform better on a 40D? (I'm interested in the broader
question, too, I guess: Is the lens the limiting factor in sharpness,
or is it the sensor?)

Click to expand...

Hi,

Thanks and yes, I used a CP. I use one whenever I can.

I don't really have an issue using it at all, though that will change once I receive my lens hood!

Cheers
Bart

Here is a sample @ 300mm + Kenko 2x TC handheld. Not that bad I think.

Canon EOS 30D - 70-300mm IS+2x TC @ 600mm - 1/125 - f/5.6 - ISO 200



Luiz Amalfi
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lamalfi

its not super sharp but with a 2x instead of the usual 1.4x i see people using it appears pretty good. How was autofocus with that or did it even work at all?

StrykeBack said:

its not super sharp but with a 2x instead of the usual 1.4x i see
people using it appears pretty good. How was autofocus with that or
did it even work at all?

Click to expand...

Hi StrykeBack.

With a 2xTC autofocus could work until aprox 180mm not beyond this.

30D - f/5.0 - 1/50 - 180mm (360mm) - ISO 1600 + Kenko Pro 300 DG 2xTC



With a 1.4xTC it could autofocus all the range.

30D - f/5.6 - 1/60 - 300mm (420mm) - ISO 1600 + Kenko Pro 300 DG 1.4xTC



Sorry for the subjects, but it's what I have bright now...

Luiz Amalfi

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lamalfi