Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM

[jpr2]

• is the mk-II equipped with an internal focusing maybe - so it doesn't extend with zooming (same like e.g. the 70-200/4 or f/2.8 series)?

• does the front element still rotates while focusing? that was a bane of the 70-300 mk-I version?

The front lens doesn't rotate while focusing on the 70-300. If I understand your first question, I believe it doesn't.

Joel

well, both the 70-300L and mk-I do extend:


Ef 70-300/4-5.6 L IS USM


EF 70-300/4-5.6 IS USM mk-I

so if the mk-II doesn't, that alone would make it a very, very welcomed mod. And when coupled with a more quick AF'ing and almost silent nano-USM, quite a better IQ and MTF like this:



it certainly looks like a winner

jpr2

--
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
~

 

[windplr]

The MK II definitely extends when zooming in/out. There is no rotation however, so using a polarizer should work fine.

 

[Dave]

Where are the reviews for this lens?

Thedigitalpicture has their test shots up.

Thanks for the heads up. Looks promising. Versus the well-respected 70-300/L it looks almost as sharp in the center and maybe slightly sharper and contrasty outside the center. If the AF speed is reasonable this could be a very solid offering.

Did Canon do such a good job with the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II that it will have to update the 70-300/L to maintain its superiority?

 

[JoelR]

Where are the reviews for this lens?

Thedigitalpicture has their test shots up.

Thanks for the heads up. Looks promising. Versus the well-respected 70-300/L it looks almost as sharp in the center and maybe slightly sharper and contrasty outside the center. If the AF speed is reasonable this could be a very solid offering.

Did Canon do such a good job with the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II that it will have to update the 70-300/L to maintain its superiority?

I have been using the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II for about two weeks and very happy with it. The focus is very fast and almost silent. The IS is very good, not sure if it's a full 4 stops. The photos are sharp with good color balance.

Joel

 

[ed rader]

70-300L is the FF replacement for the 70-200L f4 IS.

 

[BlueRay2]

70-300L is the FF replacement for the 70-200L f4 IS.

 

[jpr2]

I bet that the EF 70-300/4-5.6 IS II nano-USM must have been a pretty frequent gift of the past holiday season - yet, there are almost no samples from our users posted!!

Why that might b so???

What are your AF'ing experiences - esp. while shooting a somewhat more ambitious fast, dynamic action scenes?

Is the new nano-USM as quick and as silent as we're able to read in Canon's promo blurbd?

jpr2

 

[ttbek]

I bet that the EF 70-300/4-5.6 IS II nano-USM must have been a pretty frequent gift of the past holiday season - yet, there are almost no samples from our users posted!!

Why that might b so???

In my case I already have a 70-300 I'm very happy with. Tamron stepped up their game there and I think Canon might be feeling it which could be why this lens is here. I think a lot of people already have a lens around this focal length and the Christmas shoppers often won't know whether to go for this or the Tamron (new or old), or the 75-300 (any version), even the old 70-300 if they see one. I mean when mom/pop are looking for a surprise gift instead of one chosen by the recipient.

I think it is particularly the case that those on this forum have mostly found something in that range they use and are not in too much of a hurry to jump to yet another consumer zoom before seeing more samples and tests that prove it to be worthwhile.

What are your AF'ing experiences - esp. while shooting a somewhat more ambitious fast, dynamic action scenes?

Is the new nano-USM as quick and as silent as we're able to read in Canon's promo blurbd?

jpr2

--
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
~

 

[charlieY]

The-Digital-Picture.com has review.

"The 70-300 IS II is optically similar to or slightly softer than the last 70-300 IS I lens we tested. While the new lens does not bring us a big jump in image quality, it does bring significantly better AF and IS systems along with a considerably more modernized package."

 

[J A C S]

The-Digital-Picture.com has review.

"The 70-300 IS II is optically similar to or slightly softer than the last 70-300 IS I lens we tested. While the new lens does not bring us a big jump in image quality, it does bring significantly better AF and IS systems along with a considerably more modernized package."

Bryan (TDP) is an experienced guy. Things like AF and IS are often overlooked here at the expense of sharpness.

 

[Tom Kelley]

That's a shame because i had the last version of the 70-300 IS and like a lot of other people, i think one of the biggest complaints was the softness at the longer F/L. I myself, had no issues with the A/F, and as far as the other 'Refinements' or 'Upgrades' the newest one is supposed to have, i think they're sorta useless.

 

[diness]

That's a shame because i had the last version of the 70-300 IS and like a lot of other people, i think one of the biggest complaints was the softness at the longer F/L. I myself, had no issues with the A/F, and as far as the other 'Refinements' or 'Upgrades' the newest one is supposed to have, i think they're sorta useless.

Just be aware that Brian tested multiple copies of the original 70-300, and his earlier copy was much worse. You can see the difference when you compare the 5dsr test (newer copy of is i) and the isdiii test (older copy). If your 70-300 copy is more like his first copy, the new lens will be an improvement.

 

[Tom Kelley]

Thanks man.

 

[jpr2]

how about manual focusing by wire?

Is it really usable, or rather present there only as an "on paper" functionality decoration?

jpr2

 

[ttbek]

how about manual focusing by wire?

Is it really usable, or rather present there only as an "on paper" functionality decoration?

Other such lenses I have used from Canon and Samsung have been very usable (I've tried almost all of them for Samsung, for Canon focus by wire I have the 40mm, no real issues for me). I know some other systems have been less usable. My Canon SX10IS is actually totally unusable for this just because the screen and EVF are too bad to even tell when it is focused an it takes forever to cycle through, but that's a compact/bridge camera.... kinda surprising they gave it manual focus at all, but I appreciate that they did even if it is almost impossible to use. I think this lens will be more like the 40mm and be quite usable though. But that is just speculation.

jpr2

--
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
~

 

[jpr2]

how about manual focusing by wire?

Is it really usable, or rather present there only as an "on paper" functionality decoration?

Other such lenses I have used from Canon and Samsung have been very usable (I've tried almost all of them for Samsung, for Canon focus by wire I have the 40mm, no real issues for me). I know some other systems have been less usable. My Canon SX10IS is actually totally unusable for this just because the screen and EVF are too bad to even tell when it is focused an it takes forever to cycle through, but that's a compact/bridge camera.... kinda surprising they gave it manual focus at all, but I appreciate that they did even if it is almost impossible to use. I think this lens will be more like the 40mm and be quite usable though. But that is just speculation.

some reviews said that in the 70-300 mk-II they've implemented some sort of, how to describe it, an electronic clutch = the quicker one applies a torque manually, the more focusing throw will be put by the by-wire algorithm and HW.

I also do have the EF 40/2.8 STM, which seems to operate by similar electronic-clutch principle. The electronically controlled pseudo "throw" spans about 190-220 degs. of rotation there (hard to tell exactly as there is a lot of delay in response to a force applied, and of course the speed of manual rotation affects the angular distance quite significantly).

So, yes... with the 40/2.8 MF'ing can be done, however, I'd rather have back the fire-sure feeling, certainty and the solidity of a mechanical clutch of the yesteryear lenses.

And because we can expect significantly more angular throw distance in the 70-300 mk-II than in the 40 STM, I'm rather vacillating whether to put my order or wait till more reports on the by-wire focusing on this lens start to fill in?

jpr2

 

[ttbek]

how about manual focusing by wire?

Is it really usable, or rather present there only as an "on paper" functionality decoration?

Other such lenses I have used from Canon and Samsung have been very usable (I've tried almost all of them for Samsung, for Canon focus by wire I have the 40mm, no real issues for me). I know some other systems have been less usable. My Canon SX10IS is actually totally unusable for this just because the screen and EVF are too bad to even tell when it is focused an it takes forever to cycle through, but that's a compact/bridge camera.... kinda surprising they gave it manual focus at all, but I appreciate that they did even if it is almost impossible to use. I think this lens will be more like the 40mm and be quite usable though. But that is just speculation.

some reviews said that in the 70-300 mk-II they've implemented some sort of, how to describe it, an electronic clutch = the quicker one applies a torque manually, the more focusing throw will be put by the by-wire algorithm and HW.

Yes, you can actually adjust the speed for some Samsung lenses. But it doesn't measure the force at all, or the torque, just the rotation speed of the ring, and hence acceleration.

I also do have the EF 40/2.8 STM, which seems to operate by similar electronic-clutch principle. The electronically controlled pseudo "throw" spans about 190-220 degs. of rotation there (hard to tell exactly as there is a lot of delay in response to a force applied, and of course the speed of manual rotation affects the angular distance quite significantly).

On an M camera? there doesn't seem to be much delay on the 100D.

So, yes... with the 40/2.8 MF'ing can be done, however, I'd rather have back the fire-sure feeling, certainty and the solidity of a mechanical clutch of the yesteryear lenses.

Well, there was no clutch...

And because we can expect significantly more angular throw distance in the 70-300 mk-II than in the 40 STM, I'm rather vacillating whether to put my order or wait till more reports on the by-wire focusing on this lens start to fill in?

Hmm, if it's any assurance it works fine with the Samsung 50-200 and 18-200. I expect it will be a touch slower than what an experienced manual focuser might do with a mechanical manual focus, but really not bad.

jpr2

--
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
~

 

[Dave_K]

Finally got around to trying out the 70-300mm f4-56 IS II today. Just for giggles, I compared it to my trusty old 70-200mm L f4 IS. Wow! At 70 and 100 the 70-300mm II was sharper the the 70-200mm L. At 135mm and 200mm the 70-200mm L was way sharper than the 70-300mm IS II. Samples below. I think the exif is intact the the left side image in both.

 

[J A C S]

Finally got around to trying out the 70-300mm f4-56 IS II today. Just for giggles, I compared it to my trusty old 70-200mm L f4 IS. Wow! At 70 and 100 the 70-300mm II was sharper the the 70-200mm L.

Motion blur.

 

[Dave]

Finally got around to trying out the 70-300mm f4-56 IS II today. Just for giggles, I compared it to my trusty old 70-200mm L f4 IS. Wow! At 70 and 100 the 70-300mm II was sharper the the 70-200mm L.

Motion blur.

Tripod time?