70-300DO IS any good? Oh yeah! (Pics)

Olga Johnson · Jul 10, 2004

It all depends on how you're shooting and what you are aiming at too. No, I could never handhold a steady shot at 1/10s without IS. But even with IS it depends on where and what I am aiming at.

If I'm aiming downward, which places my arms and hands in a more comfortable, relaxed stance, and focusing on a large subject, I can get an acceptable shot with IS. But if I'm aiming upward, toward a branch of a tree 10 or 15 feet away, my arms have absolutely no steadiness and even when I stick them to the side, IS gets me a 1/100s shot that may or may not be acceptable. Aiming towards a very small subject makes things even more difficult for me.

Olga

johnd1 · Jul 10, 2004

I think Katy was only being facetious with her answer. Thats the way i took it.
John

Daniella said:
Katy C. said:

Not very sharp your examples are they!

Click to expand...

what are you talking about? the original post? yes not very sharp
in deed, but these 3 are sharp where the focusing point is. The
DOF is just small..and that's normal in this case.

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

PC Wheeler · Jul 10, 2004

msavard said:
Hi,

can you add a tc on the DO ? (probably not I guess).

Manual mentions EF 12 II and EF 25 II.

msavard said:
and how much is that lens ?

Too much: $1299

Worth every penny to me, though.

Phil

PC Wheeler · Jul 10, 2004

Daniella said:
why not try F5.6 300mm with and without IS? you used different
settings for all shots. IS is good for static subjects but won't
help at all for moving subjects, even a slight motion will be
blured at 1/10s.

Of course, who would think otherwise? IS stabilizes the shooter, not the target.

BTW -- the IS in the 70-300 DO IS is the new version. It has two modes, one for stationary targets and one for use if you are panning.

Phil

c.hammett · Jul 10, 2004

gregL281 said:
There is no bubble bursting at all, why are you so hyper sensitive
about the 70-300 DO? A statement was made (not really having
anything to do with the DO lens in particular) and we responded
with our own experience. We in no way attacked the merits of the
70-300 DO so you can call off the 70-300 DO cavalry, your god has
not been insulted and you can rest at ease.

By the way, if you were referring to my post with your 100-400
comment, my pictures were taken with the EF 400mm f/5.6L, not the
100-400 IS.

Greg

--

--Cool it. I was being funny. I also was referring to the "bubble bursting" in general (on other threads in the past few weeks) about this lens. My 70-300 DO lens hasn't even come in yet, and I am neither super-sensitive about this lens, nor am I offended by anything anyone on THIS thread has posted here. I'm referring to the frequent attacks the 70-300 DO lens on other threads. You have taken offense here unnecessarily and perhaps directed your comments to the wrong person.

Ranger a.k.a chammett
http://www.pbase.com/chammett

katy C. · Jul 10, 2004

Olga Johnson said:
It all depends on how you're shooting and what you are aiming at
too. No, I could never handhold a steady shot at 1/10s without IS.
But even with IS it depends on where and what I am aiming at.

If I'm aiming downward, which places my arms and hands in a more
comfortable, relaxed stance, and focusing on a large subject, I can
get an acceptable shot with IS. But if I'm aiming upward, toward a
branch of a tree 10 or 15 feet away, my arms have absolutely no
steadiness and even when I stick them to the side, IS gets me a
1/100s shot that may or may not be acceptable. Aiming towards a
very small subject makes things even more difficult for me.

Olga

Hi I am thinking of buying the 70-300 do IS, but I find all these back and forth arguments very confusing. The only experience I have with IS is with the 28-135 IS so I know for a fact when walking around getting people and architectural shots with it my hit rate has improved almost 100 per cent. My hands are not very steady! As the IS on the DO lens is faster it MUST be good. Whats holding me back is this forum which hasn't helped me decide the most crucial argument: IS IT WORTH THE MONEY!!!!!! Katy

Olga Johnson · Jul 10, 2004

Katy C. said:
katy C. said:

IS IT WORTH THE MONEY!!!!!! Katy

Click to expand...

That's a question that only you can answer, Katy.

Personally I would have waited to see what happens to the price, if I had the luxury of time. But I'm taking a 5 or 6 week trip during which I would not haul any of the other teles I own due to space and weight. So I ordered it for evaluation and decided to keep it knowing that I'm paying a premium for the convenience of size and weight.

As it has turned out, I find that I tend to grab it rather than the 100-400L more times than not, even when I'm not travelling.

Olga

Wintermist · Jul 10, 2004

Jury is still out for me, the IS rocks (for me) but almost every picture has halos in it, i'm not sure if this is the case with all DO's or just mine, so i'm going to be exhanging it when my shop gets more in. I have to problem at all times not just at macro or long shots.

Olga Johnson said:
Katy C. said:

Olga Johnson said:

IS IT WORTH THE MONEY!!!!!! Katy

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

That's a question that only you can answer, Katy.

Personally I would have waited to see what happens to the price, if
I had the luxury of time. But I'm taking a 5 or 6 week trip during
which I would not haul any of the other teles I own due to space
and weight. So I ordered it for evaluation and decided to keep it
knowing that I'm paying a premium for the convenience of size and
weight.

As it has turned out, I find that I tend to grab it rather than the
100-400L more times than not, even when I'm not travelling.

Olga

--
No rest for the wicked!

MFfan310 · Jul 10, 2004

It's on its way from Amazon and it should be at my house in about a week. In my case, it will replace a mediocre Canon 75-300mm Mk III (no IS, no USM).

Olga Johnson · Jul 10, 2004

Wintermist said:
Jury is still out for me, the IS rocks (for me) but almost every
picture has halos in it, i'm not sure if this is the case with all
DO's or just mine, so i'm going to be exhanging it when my shop
gets more in. I have to problem at all times not just at macro or
long shots.

What kind of halos? Do you have a sample?

Olga

PC Wheeler · Jul 10, 2004

Wintermist said:
Jury is still out for me, the IS rocks (for me) but almost every
picture has halos in it, i'm not sure if this is the case with all
DO's or just mine, so i'm going to be exhanging it when my shop
gets more in.

The DO is implemented with a Fresnel lens type of approach, so there are coincentric circles in the lens. If I shoot too near the sun, or a strong source of reflected sunlight, I see halos in the viewfinder and also can see excessive flare.

But to date, using my left hand to shade the lens front from the strong source of light when I see the effect in the VF, I've been able to avoid the appearance of flare or halos in ANY image -- and I NEVER use the supplied shade. Shooting away from the sun or at right angles to it, you should never see these issues.

I think it is a wonderful lens, my best (at least in terms of fun!) -- and I do have some L glass. I've gotten shots I could have with no other lens I own. And it is relatively small and light (not much heavier or larger than my 28-135 IS and 17-40 f/4 L) -- a very "hikable lens.

Phil

athomes · Jul 10, 2004

I'm thinking of getting this lens next. Be sure to give an update as you get to know the lens, including new pics. Heres a link that does a test on IS, pictures included.

http://bobatkins.photo.net/photography/tutorials/is.html

Wintermist said:
Just got my 70-300DO today and it was getting late so I went
outside to get some shot and when I checked them out I was a bit
let down, quite soft. Then I realized what the EXIF was on them
all about 300mm F5.6 1/100 sec and lower, now I'm quite impressed
the opposite none of the shots were blurry, just soft. So this got
me thinking what's the best I can do and made this test.

No one, and I mean No one can hand hold a shot at 300mm 1/10 a sec
with out this IS, the IS on here blows the IS on the 28-135 away!
Amazed I am, can't wait for a bright sunny day now!

Wintermist
--
No rest for the wicked!

Wintermist · Jul 10, 2004

Yes halo, or in some cases dreamy which i've seen before, but this is EVERY shot, I even had a double image in one. It's focus is also very, very soft, and it's not a matter of back or front focus, it's just soft. I mean my kit lens is way sharper, it must be a bad copy. I'll post some shots in a bit.

athomes said:
http://bobatkins.photo.net/photography/tutorials/is.html

Wintermist said:

Just got my 70-300DO today and it was getting late so I went
outside to get some shot and when I checked them out I was a bit
let down, quite soft. Then I realized what the EXIF was on them
all about 300mm F5.6 1/100 sec and lower, now I'm quite impressed
the opposite none of the shots were blurry, just soft. So this got
me thinking what's the best I can do and made this test.

No one, and I mean No one can hand hold a shot at 300mm 1/10 a sec
with out this IS, the IS on here blows the IS on the 28-135 away!
Amazed I am, can't wait for a bright sunny day now!

Wintermist
--
No rest for the wicked!

Click to expand...

--
No rest for the wicked!

Bagit · Jul 10, 2004

I am thinking about ordering this lens next week and I would like your opinion on it.
Thanks.

Wintermist said:
athomes said:

http://bobatkins.photo.net/photography/tutorials/is.html

Wintermist said:

Just got my 70-300DO today and it was getting late so I went
outside to get some shot and when I checked them out I was a bit
let down, quite soft. Then I realized what the EXIF was on them
all about 300mm F5.6 1/100 sec and lower, now I'm quite impressed
the opposite none of the shots were blurry, just soft. So this got
me thinking what's the best I can do and made this test.

No one, and I mean No one can hand hold a shot at 300mm 1/10 a sec
with out this IS, the IS on here blows the IS on the 28-135 away!
Amazed I am, can't wait for a bright sunny day now!

Wintermist
--
No rest for the wicked!

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
No rest for the wicked!

Wintermist · Jul 10, 2004

Ok here are all the problems I've had at this gallery:

http://www.pbase.com/wintermist/tests

I know about some of the short commings of the DO but this is happening far to much, even a 150bux lens is sharper, and this cost me 1300?? I can't get one decent sharp pic even at 1/500sec stoped to f10. The last pic is the scariest its got a double image, and it's not shake or the camera, I can reproduce that image everytime I take it with only this lens.

I can't say what I think because I hope I have a bad copy, the IS is the best i've seen, but that's all i can say. I love the size and wight of it, balance is nice with the 300D, but I'll wait till I get a replacement to talk about the optics.

Bagit said:
Wintermist said:

athomes said:

http://bobatkins.photo.net/photography/tutorials/is.html

Wintermist said:

Just got my 70-300DO today and it was getting late so I went
outside to get some shot and when I checked them out I was a bit
let down, quite soft. Then I realized what the EXIF was on them
all about 300mm F5.6 1/100 sec and lower, now I'm quite impressed
the opposite none of the shots were blurry, just soft. So this got
me thinking what's the best I can do and made this test.

No one, and I mean No one can hand hold a shot at 300mm 1/10 a sec
with out this IS, the IS on here blows the IS on the 28-135 away!
Amazed I am, can't wait for a bright sunny day now!

Wintermist
--
No rest for the wicked!

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
No rest for the wicked!

Click to expand...

--
No rest for the wicked!

slipstream · Jul 10, 2004

Wow i'm amazed what some of you guys can handhold without IS I could never do that.

But I must say this latest generation of IS amases me every time i need it.

The folowing pic was taken with the new DO at 195 mm and 1 sec shutter.

I still don't understand how this worked out and am really wondering if you guys could maybe manage the same at 300mm seeing your great results without IS.

Wintermist · Jul 10, 2004

I wish I could get a pic that sharp, there must be a problem with my copy

slipstream said:
Wow i'm amazed what some of you guys can handhold without IS I
could never do that.

But I must say this latest generation of IS amases me every time i
need it.

The folowing pic was taken with the new DO at 195 mm and 1 sec
shutter.

I still don't understand how this worked out and am really
wondering if you guys could maybe manage the same at 300mm seeing
your great results without IS.

--
No rest for the wicked!

The Big Bad · Jul 10, 2004

Sorry to take over a thread with a post for a friend, but was wondering if you got that sigma 500 f4.5 yet brian. Didnt see any post with your impressions of it

I of course wish you were stilling shooting a 300 2.8 IS but your thought on that lesn will be of intrest to me dispite my sympthaties for your lose.

I know you'll get on yoru feet again in no time and be producing some great shots again and singing the prasies of the "value lenses" =)
--
http://www.pbase.com/bigbad

Daniella68313 · Jul 10, 2004

I think that's wat we usualy call dreaminess. it produces a sort of halow around bright edges..like a ghosting.

Olga Johnson said:
Wintermist said:

Jury is still out for me, the IS rocks (for me) but almost every
picture has halos in it, i'm not sure if this is the case with all
DO's or just mine, so i'm going to be exhanging it when my shop
gets more in. I have to problem at all times not just at macro or
long shots.

Click to expand...

What kind of halos? Do you have a sample?

Olga

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

drip · Jul 10, 2004

The Big Bad said:
Sorry to take over a thread with a post for a friend, but was
wondering if you got that sigma 500 f4.5 yet brian. Didnt see any
post with your impressions of it

Got it and found it wold freeze the 300D when trying to stop down. The manager at KEH obviously tested it wide open only. So I returned it. But based on limited test shots at wide open, conclusion was not worth pursuing it. Perhaps the newer Sigma 500/4.5 EX is a lot better, but not this older version whcih is incompatible with 300D.

The Big Bad said:
I of course wish you were stilling shooting a 300 2.8 IS but your
thought on that lesn will be of intrest to me dispite my
sympthaties for your lose.

I just traded my 120-300 plus cash for a 300/2.8IS from Greg M at FM. I also have a 300/2.8 non-IS fro B&H right now but most likely will return it. Trying to shoot 840mm without IS in the shade is just a bit tough.

The Big Bad said:
I know you'll get on yoru feet again in no time and be producing
some great shots again and singing the prasies of the "value
lenses" =)

I basically did what I had done before by re-acquiring my previously two main lenses: Bigma and 300/2.8IS. Even after thoughts after thoughts, they are still the best tool for me. Not sure about the "value" of the 300 since it's quite pricey, but the Bigma certainly is on top of my value list.
--
Brian
Dallas, TX
300D owner
http://www.pbase.com/drip

70-300DO IS any good? Oh yeah! (Pics)

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Active member

Leading Member

Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts