EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

Started 9 months ago | Discussions
Back2M Regular Member • Posts: 367
EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

C-RAW processed in DPP4. Taken last night when there was a pause in the rain. @200mm and f/11 this is the sharpest end of the lens. Landscape picture profile w/+2 Contrast used

SOOC JPEG; normal (not fine). Standard Picture Profile w/+2 Contrast. In-camera DLO

SOOC JPEG; normal (not fine). Standard Picture Profile w/+2 Contrast. In-camera DLO. NR-standard used (which does destroy some detail/color). Of note, f/8 does alot for 300mm vs wide open.

SOOC JPEG; normal (not fine). Standard Picture Profile w/+2 Contrast. In-camera DLO. NR-standard used (which does destroy some detail/color). Wide open at 300mm.

Here's a best case (200mm @ f/11), normal case (70mm wide open with less than ideal light) and worst case (300mm wide open, macro in the dark) samples.

Note, even at ISO12800, stopping down to f/8 produced better colors, not just sharpness. This is a lens that performs best stopped down a bit, particularly at 300mm.

Also note, even very basic in-camera +2 contrast does the trick for bringing contrast back into the images. As long as you're exposing correctly IE within 2 stops of correct exposure, basic in-camera post does the trick here with making this lens shine.

2nd note, this is a 2nd hand-lens which does have noteable (but not substantial) dust in it. I don't note any impact on IQ, however, I don't have a clean optic to compare. I'll be looking into getting a quote to remove the dust. Depending on the price, I may or may not get it removed as often dust doesn't have a real impact. In this case though, contrast, which this lens lacks, it's not small potatoes as dust can reduce your contrast. Most (probably almost every) used copies of this lens are going to have dust in it due to age and use. I did however get it at a very ($300) reasonable price. Even if I get the dust removed, contrast will still need to be bumped. I'm curious though how much impact that dust is, or isn't having, and how much it costs to get it serviced as I suspect most folks interested in this gem are going 2nd-hand which this will be a common issue.

As weather permits I'll update the thread. I've gotten some very good samples off the lens as far as IQ goes, but, I'd prefer to wait for more interesting subjects/framing to post IE I'll add more interesting samples as I capture them. Weather should permit this weekend. We'll see.

 Back2M's gear list:Back2M's gear list
Canon G1 X III Canon EOS R Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM Canon 70-300 F4-5.6 IS II Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro
Rock and Rollei Senior Member • Posts: 1,772
Re: EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

Unless it's a thick layer of dust, it won't have much impact on a tele lens.

Your results seem about right for the lens. It's respectable, but was poor value at the original price - the standard 70-300 IS USM is as good, but was half the price. At the price you've paid, it's a bargain. Yes, the L lens is better, and if you're paying basically the same price, the DO makes little sense, but at your price, I would buy one again. But at 300mm, you do need to stop down, that's just the way it is.

 Rock and Rollei's gear list:Rock and Rollei's gear list
Canon EOS M Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS M5 +34 more
OP Back2M Regular Member • Posts: 367
Re: EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

Rock and Rollei wrote:

Unless it's a thick layer of dust, it won't have much impact on a tele lens.

Your results seem about right for the lens. It's respectable, but was poor value at the original price - the standard 70-300 IS USM is as good, but was half the price. At the price you've paid, it's a bargain. Yes, the L lens is better, and if you're paying basically the same price, the DO makes little sense, but at your price, I would buy one again. But at 300mm, you do need to stop down, that's just the way it is.

Yup, just finished reading many of Roger C's blogs and came to the same conclusion: the level of dust I have in this lens, which is I'd rate 2/10, which for it's age is excellent, should have zero impact on IQ.

In my case I went DO for size purposes (not so much weight) and low-profile. Throw a hood on (which I haven't needed to, yet, but will) it gets bigger when in use, but stored in my bag it's small. And since I don't need the hood all the time, just sometimes, it's fine.

KEH is having a 15% off sale right now and there is a BGN in stock for $333. Just saying.

If Canon did a RF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM I'd be all over it, even at a MSRP of the original 70-300 DO. The new double gapless frenzel of the 400 DO II really pays dividends and being able to shrink the lens down another inch through no adapter makes it more compact. It'd still be around 700g, but, 130g less as no adapter needed. Darn thing would be smaller than a EF-S 55-250 mounted on a Rebel if they made one, and sharper too potentially.

 Back2M's gear list:Back2M's gear list
Canon G1 X III Canon EOS R Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM Canon 70-300 F4-5.6 IS II Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro
trulandphoto
trulandphoto Contributing Member • Posts: 877
Re: EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM
1

Yup, I had one of these DO zooms for a few months. In addition to contrast, if there's any bright light in the scene it gets washed out.

I actually like the IS II USM lens. Better IQ, AF and IS than the DO.

 trulandphoto's gear list:trulandphoto's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM +12 more
OP Back2M Regular Member • Posts: 367
Re: EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

trulandphoto wrote:

Yup, I had one of these DO zooms for a few months. In addition to contrast, if there's any bright light in the scene it gets washed out.

I actually like the IS II USM lens. Better IQ, AF and IS than the DO.

I'm giving it a shot before I go that route; I haven't ruled out that option as I was very impressed with the 70-300 IS II USM mounted on the M50 at BestBuy when I tried it, very impressed. The IQ on the 70-300 IS II USM is certainly better, it's also bigger though. I found even Tamron 100-400, although the lightest EF 100-400 mount zoom on the market, still was too bulky. For the price, I figured I'd give this guy a shot, besides, it's smaller, really hard to beat that as size is a big priority here. I've found mounted on the R adapted it's the correct profile; it's pushing the edge of acceptable though for my style of shooting.

But worth the trade? We'll see. Going to really put it through it's paces and see if it delivers enough IQ. If not, the seller has a 30-day return window. I'm pretty confident at this junction I'll be keeping. However, with all this rain and cloud cover, I have yet to encounter strong counter light requiring the hood yet. That could change the game here if either mounting that hood becomes an issue, or IQ doesn't meet minimums in my book, etc. I'm finding when used correctly IE f/8 and +2 contrast it's meeting my needs. As lighting changes, that may change too based off samples I've seen from others from this lens. Also the bokeh is a bit iffy, arguably that's my biggest hangup. Pictures like that water tower are great because there is no bokeh; the background is the sky. That foliage though? That "dreamy" bokeh is not my dream. We'll see how it does in normal not-overcast daytime.

The 70-300 IS II USM is plan B.

 Back2M's gear list:Back2M's gear list
Canon G1 X III Canon EOS R Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM Canon 70-300 F4-5.6 IS II Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro
OP Back2M Regular Member • Posts: 367
Re: EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

trulandphoto wrote:

Yup, I had one of these DO zooms for a few months. In addition to contrast, if there's any bright light in the scene it gets washed out.

I actually like the IS II USM lens. Better IQ, AF and IS than the DO.

Curious, did the scene get washed out with the hood on? I presume yes, and it was direct light and hence the issue IE the hood couldn't prevent.

 Back2M's gear list:Back2M's gear list
Canon G1 X III Canon EOS R Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM Canon 70-300 F4-5.6 IS II Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro
fishy wishy
fishy wishy Veteran Member • Posts: 9,335
Re: EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

Its only strength is that it packs really short. It's wildly overpriced for its capabilities, and only a rich loon would pay more than $500 for it.

It's not bad, except that the contrast at 300 needs a bump.

OP Back2M Regular Member • Posts: 367
More Samples - Better Light

As promised, some samples from the EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM adapted on the EOS R. All SOOC JPEGs, S2 Normal, Auto Picture Style with +2 Saturation (important). Low Noise reduction.

 Back2M's gear list:Back2M's gear list
Canon G1 X III Canon EOS R Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM Canon 70-300 F4-5.6 IS II Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro
fishy wishy
fishy wishy Veteran Member • Posts: 9,335
Re: More Samples - Better Light

That's interesting. Is it playing nice with the R?

OP Back2M Regular Member • Posts: 367
Re: More Samples - Better Light

fishy wishy wrote:

That's interesting. Is it playing nice with the R?

Yes and no.

It's fast and accurate AF.

The IS works great, when it works which is the problem. Half the time it fails to engage. I've made it part of setup routine to turn on the camera, turn off the IS on the lens and then turn it back on. I don't know if this is due to the EOS R constantly driving the IS motor and thus is causing erronous results on the older IS system, or, if the IS motor itself on the copy of the lens I got (as it's used) is simply on the way out.

DLO works for the lens without issue.

Image quality is good, which I gather the EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM works best on full frames, which the R is a full frame.

Obviously with the EOS R I have no AFMA issues too.

I've always been curious about the 70-300 DO, and, I tried the lightest native EF mount 100-400 IE the Tamron and found it still too heavy/bulky so I wanted to go as minimal as possible. The 70-300 DO does do the job nicely. It may only be 300g lighter, but, the weight distibrution is far more desirable as all the weight is toward the camera, not the peripherial like a traditional 100-400 or 70-300 would be making the handling awkward. Zoom ring is nicely placed/balanced as is the control ring on adapter. Mounting and unmounting is awkward, as is the 17-40L. The 85mm and 50mm's handle well though. Zoom creep is a notable issue on the 70-300 DO though. That zoom lock is used whenever it's not being shot. Standard procedure to de-engage it prior to shooting and re-engage it when it rests at my side via blackrapid strap on the R itself.

 Back2M's gear list:Back2M's gear list
Canon G1 X III Canon EOS R Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM Canon 70-300 F4-5.6 IS II Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro
simonmgc
simonmgc Regular Member • Posts: 111
Re: EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

For fun, I bought one of these very cheaply too. As well as the dust, it came with a free line of fungus across an internal element.

A local repair guy told me not to worry about trying to remove it, but gave me instructions on how to remove the front element and clean the dust, which I did.

I have not used it much, but did a few test shots and can't see the effect of the fungus or the remaing dust.

-- hide signature --
 simonmgc's gear list:simonmgc's gear list
Canon 6D Mark II Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM Canon EF 24-70mm F4L IS USM Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads