Very sharp with great contrast over entire focal range

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM is a compact weather sealed L quality lens that operates very well with R5 as part of a compact travel kit.  It's very short length similar to the RF 24-105mmf4 L IS in length make them both easy fit in my bag upright rather than laying down like large lenses require.    The render, bokeh and sharpness when shooting wide open are equally excellent throughout the complete zoom range.   The corners and edges are moderately sharp and improve with when reducing aperture one stop.   This is not large aperture lens like a f2 or f2.8 but it is very sharp even wide open at f4 at 70mm and f5.6 at 300mm as well as everywhere in between.

RDM5546 wrote:

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM is a compact weather sealed L quality lens that operates very well with R5 as part of a compact travel kit. It's very short length similar to the RF 24-105mmf4 L IS in length make them both easy fit in my bag upright rather than laying down like large lenses require. The render, bokeh and sharpness when shooting wide open are equally excellent throughout the complete zoom range. The corners and edges are moderately sharp and improve with when reducing aperture one stop. This is not large aperture lens like a f2 or f2.8 but it is very sharp even wide open at f4 at 70mm and f5.6 at 300mm as well as everywhere in between.

I concur one of canons best lens.

Do you have any commens about the AF speed of the lens? Did you shoot anything moving by chance?

Octopuss wrote:

Do you have any comments about the AF speed of the lens? Did you shoot anything moving by chance

I also have the EF100-400L II which is very similar in focus speed to the EF 70-300L. It is a lot longer lens though. If I were using it to shoot wild life I would strongly prefer the extra reach of the EF100-400L II but I think the focus properties of both lenses are nearly identical. The EF70-300L came out in 2010 long before the EF100-400L II.

Before the EF 100-400II which is weather sealed I had the EF 100-400 Mk I dating back to 2001. I hated the push pull zoom control and lack of weather or dust sealing of that lens https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=50552

The arrival of the radically improved design of the 100-400L II mad quite a difference.   I believe the 70-300L is the design predecessor of the 100-400L II.   Both have lots similarities and the 70-300L was produced about four years before the 100-400L II.

The 70-300L is 2.1lbs which is heavy by comparison to the 1.6lbs of the cheaper consumer grade 70-300 II IS USM which was the first lens to have a nanomotor USM.   However it is not metal construction rugged or weather sealed which be important i some travel use cases.  The consumer grade model is not has sharp and good IQ although is good for lenses in it's price range of $600.  The 70-300L is excellent IQ and something special as also is the 100-400L II but it is bigger and significantly more expensive.

Both are special lenses and the 100-400L II has a very attractive reach for shooting wildlife and small birds.   With the EOS R, R6 and R5 bodies the 100-400L II works well with the Canon 1.4X III and 2X III TCs for even greater range while the 70-300L does not really work well with the TCs and they are not recommended to be used.

However the much smaller size of the 70-300L fits upright in camera bags and in travel bags much easier with less travel weight than the 100-400L II.   If wildlife is the objective the I recommend something with more reach like the 100-400L II.

I recently splurged and got the RF 100-500 and the RF1.4X and 2X TCs.  The IQ of the 100-500L is spectacular and maybe better than the EF100-400L III but not by much if any.   However, the focus speed is faster and the keeper is therefore higher when shooting action with R5.  Once you use the RF100-500 it hard to go back to the EF 100-400II though I love the lens.   However, the cost of the RF 100-500 with the two TCs is very expensive at over $4,000 including sales tax.

All three of the L lenses are spectacular and the 70-300L is now ten years old so you can buy them used in great condition for around $800 if you want a top grade travel lens.

RDM5546 wrote:

Octopuss wrote:

Do you have any comments about the AF speed of the lens? Did you shoot anything moving by chance

I also have the EF100-400L II which is very similar in focus speed to the EF 70-300L. It is a lot longer lens though. If I were using it to shoot wild life I would strongly prefer the extra reach of the EF100-400L II but I think the focus properties of both lenses are nearly identical. The EF70-300L came out in 2010 long before the EF100-400L II.

Before the EF 100-400II which is weather sealed I had the EF 100-400 Mk I dating back to 2001. I hated the push pull zoom control and lack of weather or dust sealing of that lens https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=50552

The arrival of the radically improved design of the 100-400L II mad quite a difference. I believe the 70-300L is the design predecessor of the 100-400L II. Both have lots similarities and the 70-300L was produced about four years before the 100-400L II.

The 70-300L is 2.1lbs which is heavy by comparison to the 1.6lbs of the cheaper consumer grade 70-300 II IS USM which was the first lens to have a nanomotor USM. However it is not metal construction rugged or weather sealed which be important i some travel use cases. The consumer grade model is not has sharp and good IQ although is good for lenses in it's price range of $600. The 70-300L is excellent IQ and something special as also is the 100-400L II but it is bigger and significantly more expensive.

Both are special lenses and the 100-400L II has a very attractive reach for shooting wildlife and small birds. With the EOS R, R6 and R5 bodies the 100-400L II works well with the Canon 1.4X III and 2X III TCs for even greater range while the 70-300L does not really work well with the TCs and they are not recommended to be used.

However the much smaller size of the 70-300L fits upright in camera bags and in travel bags much easier with less travel weight than the 100-400L II. If wildlife is the objective the I recommend something with more reach like the 100-400L II.

I recently splurged and got the RF 100-500 and the RF1.4X and 2X TCs. The IQ of the 100-500L is spectacular and maybe better than the EF100-400L III but not by much if any. However, the focus speed is faster and the keeper is therefore higher when shooting action with R5. Once you use the RF100-500 it hard to go back to the EF 100-400II though I love the lens. However, the cost of the RF 100-500 with the two TCs is very expensive at over $4,000 including sales tax.

All three of the L lenses are spectacular and the 70-300L is now ten years old so you can buy them used in great condition for around $800 if you want a top grade travel lens.

I think two youtube reviews reveal a great deal about the performance of this lens

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTGPG_kujD0   Dustin Abbott was really impressed with the lens despite the high price he thought it be a keeper for him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctIu_4YiUbg

RDM5546 wrote:

Octopuss wrote:

Do you have any comments about the AF speed of the lens? Did you shoot anything moving by chance

I also have the EF100-400L II which is very similar in focus speed to the EF 70-300L. It is a lot longer lens though. If I were using it to shoot wild life I would strongly prefer the extra reach of the EF100-400L II but I think the focus properties of both lenses are nearly identical. The EF70-300L came out in 2010 long before the EF100-400L II.

Before the EF 100-400II which is weather sealed I had the EF 100-400 Mk I dating back to 2001. I hated the push pull zoom control and lack of weather or dust sealing of that lens https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=50552

The arrival of the radically improved design of the 100-400L II mad quite a difference. I believe the 70-300L is the design predecessor of the 100-400L II. Both have lots similarities and the 70-300L was produced about four years before the 100-400L II.

The 70-300L is 2.1lbs which is heavy by comparison to the 1.6lbs of the cheaper consumer grade 70-300 II IS USM which was the first lens to have a nanomotor USM. However it is not metal construction rugged or weather sealed which be important i some travel use cases. The consumer grade model is not has sharp and good IQ although is good for lenses in it's price range of $600. The 70-300L is excellent IQ and something special as also is the 100-400L II but it is bigger and significantly more expensive.

Both are special lenses and the 100-400L II has a very attractive reach for shooting wildlife and small birds. With the EOS R, R6 and R5 bodies the 100-400L II works well with the Canon 1.4X III and 2X III TCs for even greater range while the 70-300L does not really work well with the TCs and they are not recommended to be used.

However the much smaller size of the 70-300L fits upright in camera bags and in travel bags much easier with less travel weight than the 100-400L II. If wildlife is the objective the I recommend something with more reach like the 100-400L II.

I recently splurged and got the RF 100-500 and the RF1.4X and 2X TCs. The IQ of the 100-500L is spectacular and maybe better than the EF100-400L III but not by much if any. However, the focus speed is faster and the keeper is therefore higher when shooting action with R5. Once you use the RF100-500 it hard to go back to the EF 100-400II though I love the lens. However, the cost of the RF 100-500 with the two TCs is very expensive at over $4,000 including sales tax.

All three of the L lenses are spectacular and the 70-300L is now ten years old so you can buy them used in great condition for around $800 if you want a top grade travel lens.

Uhm, thanks, but you didn't answer my question...

I'm interested to read how people find this lens with an adaptor on mirrorless. When my 5DIV eventually dies — hopefully not for a few years yet — it's reassuring to know it will still perform.

Octopuss wrote:

RDM5546 wrote:

Octopuss wrote:

Do you have any comments about the AF speed of the lens? Did you shoot anything moving by chance

I also have the EF100-400L II which is very similar in focus speed to the EF 70-300L. It is a lot longer lens though. If I were using it to shoot wild life I would strongly prefer the extra reach of the EF100-400L II but I think the focus properties of both lenses are nearly identical. The EF70-300L came out in 2010 long before the EF100-400L II.

Before the EF 100-400II which is weather sealed I had the EF 100-400 Mk I dating back to 2001. I hated the push pull zoom control and lack of weather or dust sealing of that lens https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=50552

The arrival of the radically improved design of the 100-400L II mad quite a difference. I believe the 70-300L is the design predecessor of the 100-400L II. Both have lots similarities and the 70-300L was produced about four years before the 100-400L II.

The 70-300L is 2.1lbs which is heavy by comparison to the 1.6lbs of the cheaper consumer grade 70-300 II IS USM which was the first lens to have a nanomotor USM. However it is not metal construction rugged or weather sealed which be important i some travel use cases. The consumer grade model is not has sharp and good IQ although is good for lenses in it's price range of $600. The 70-300L is excellent IQ and something special as also is the 100-400L II but it is bigger and significantly more expensive.

Both are special lenses and the 100-400L II has a very attractive reach for shooting wildlife and small birds. With the EOS R, R6 and R5 bodies the 100-400L II works well with the Canon 1.4X III and 2X III TCs for even greater range while the 70-300L does not really work well with the TCs and they are not recommended to be used.

However the much smaller size of the 70-300L fits upright in camera bags and in travel bags much easier with less travel weight than the 100-400L II. If wildlife is the objective the I recommend something with more reach like the 100-400L II.

I recently splurged and got the RF 100-500 and the RF1.4X and 2X TCs. The IQ of the 100-500L is spectacular and maybe better than the EF100-400L III but not by much if any. However, the focus speed is faster and the keeper is therefore higher when shooting action with R5. Once you use the RF100-500 it hard to go back to the EF 100-400II though I love the lens. However, the cost of the RF 100-500 with the two TCs is very expensive at over $4,000 including sales tax.

All three of the L lenses are spectacular and the 70-300L is now ten years old so you can buy them used in great condition for around $800 if you want a top grade travel lens.

Uhm, thanks, but you didn't answer my question...

Sorry for the long winded response. Exact values or metrics for focus speed are not easy to quantify or make. The EF 70-300 is fast in focus IMHO but not as fast or accurate as the RF 100-500 and I do not think it is long enough in FL for wildlife shooting I like to do which requires 400mm minimum to make me happy.  It is well suited to shooting grandkids playing sports or soccer action shooting.  It well suited for hiqh quality travel shooting and not having the travel overhead of bigger better telephotos for wildlife like the RF100-500 that overlaps the FL of the EF70-300L but at the price of weight and travel sizing bag limits.

Since I have both lenses I would be a good source to say it is fast enough but it is definitely not a slow focus lens light some lenses can be. For shooting wildlife I find the 100-400II has much more needed reach especially considering how well it works with the 1.4X III and 2X III TCs. I have some of primes that are very slow in focus and 70-300 is fairly fast and is a handy good IQ travel lens for me but the lens reach limits it for wildlife and for me the capability is not near that of the 100-400II. Of course price matters as well as your usage. I also have the smaller and lighter RF 24-240 which is also fast, handy with excellent IQ for travel but it is not weather sealed or as rugged. These details of usage matter to me. I do not like the RF STM motor lenses that I own for focus speed and the EF 70-300 is much more suited for fast speed action shooting than the STM motor lenses I have tried.

I bought my second-hand copy several years ago, and used it for some time on my 7D MkII.  Only when I used it on a full-frame body did I discover that it was badly lacking at the edges.  Canon UK repaired it, and it's now fine with whatever type of body I use it on.

Lesson learnt, I hope - try on full-frame bodies before accepting a "used" lens.

1Dx4me wrote:

as good as this lens is, and i almost got a copy of it, but canon 100-400 II is much better than this one, although slightly longer when retrieved. if you look at both lenses side by side, 100-400 II shines. but that said, 70-300 is nice to have for travel or just walking around. if i was to do it again, i'd put mu money on 100-400 f4.5-5.6 again. just my 2 cents.

I think you absolutely made the right choice for shooting wildlife in an EF mount lens. It works well with the 1.4X III and 2XIII TCs and the EF 70-300mmL is not recommended to use with these TCs as they do not even fit unless the Z00M is out to 220-300mmm. It is a pain to lose so much zoom range when using the Canon TCs on the 100-300mm.

I have have the EF 100-400 f4.5-5.6L II and do use it for wildlife. The 100-400 is much bigger and twice and heavy as the 100-300 which is less likely attracting of unwanted attended in some situatons. Like you I would not recommend the 100-300 as a great wildlife lens though. It is a family, kids, or grandkids walking around lens. I am now with the R5 more than my 5D4 and I prefer the RF 24-240mm for a vacation or travel lens. The niche for the EF 70-300mm for me is shrinking some but the 70-300 is sharper edge to edge than the RF24-240mm in the 150-240 range if that is desired use.  Different shooting events have different needs.

Graham Meale wrote:

I'm interested to read how people find this lens with an adaptor on mirrorless. When my 5DIV eventually dies — hopefully not for a few years yet — it's reassuring to know it will still perform.

It works fine on both my R and R6

How did you feel that the image quality of the EF 70-300L compares to the EF 70-300II NanoUSM?  I have the EF 100-400L II and love the way that it renders images, is the EF 70-300 similar to that or not as good?

I bought mine to shoot high school tennis (at which it excelled) and have pressed it into service as a travel lens.  While it’s clearly stretched for wildlife, I’ve gotten some memorable shots.

Picked up a used copy of the EF 70-300L.  Have been using it on various bodies and it seems to be nearly as sharp as the EF 100-400L II at the same focal lengths.

I am anxious to try more sports with this lens.

tdbmd wrote:

I am anxious to try more sports with this lens.

I liked EF 70-300L for soccer by 10 to 15 year olds