Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS USM

[Hobby Shooter]

When you shoot tele you deal with a lot of the "transition zone" that can make for some ugly bokeh. The 70-300L does a nice job with that transition zone. I have not really seen anything too ugly coming out of it. Having owned two copies each of the 70-200L (IS and non IS) f/4 zooms, I can safely say that I prefer this lens to those. I haven't used Canon's 70-200 f/2.8L zooms enough to have an opinion there, but the size of those lens makes them less of a travel option. I would probably love the 70-200LII for my event work, though.

Indeed, quality of the bokeh in stark gradient areas is a real differentiator and this doesn't always show up in "measurements". In this context, the 70-300L generates really plesant bokeh.

As for 70-200's, I own the f/4 IS and the f/2.8 IS II... While the 70-200 2.8II is a highly competent sharp zoom, it is not the second coming as some fanboys would have us all believe. It is sharp and versatile, but also heavy, and obvious. And most fair-minded people will agree the f/2.8II is not known for its silky bokeh... then again that may not be its main purpose. I periodically knock the 70-200 2.8II here simply because some fanboys just praise it to the heavens... I jokingly call it the "I-too-have-arrived-pricey-but-achievable-newbie zoom", just to poke them a bit .

Here is a 700-200 f.2.8 II image and the bokeh crop...it is competent zoom even on grey winter days but I never found the bokeh something to write home about.

Hmm, I am one of those guys, I guess I just don't like you any longer

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Not a birder, but I have found the 70-300L to be a very nice "birding" lens. While it isn't particularly long on a full frame, the great resolving power makes serious cropping possible while upholding great detail. And, as I said earlier, I am really surprised by how well it handles transition zone bokeh. Nice and soft without a lot of distracting hard edges. This is pretty fantastic considering how sharp the lens is.


Snowbirds by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Here is a roughly 100% crop of the primary goose that makes me seriously happy:

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Even at 300mm, wide open, this lens still provides great sharpness and contrast:


Better than Winter by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

The lighting here (and resulting color) is muted, but the detail is sharp even at full magnification.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Here's a medium focal range shot that shows off the excellent bokeh of the lens. This is ISO 2500, shot with a polarizer to reduce reflection from the glass.


Slither by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Here's another "zoo shot" (the 70-300L might be ultimate zoo lens)


Golden Lion Tamarin by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

This lens renders such fantastic detail:


Attitude by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Burrowing Owl by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

This shot is a near 100% crop (the original was already 300mm) to show off the great detail on the lion's nose:


Battle-scarred by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

 

[zim]

Absolutely loving all the photos being posted showcasing this lens, only thing is guy’s I think your all pushing the price of it up especially you Dustin and I’m still saving, now stop it and post some duffers

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Here's a duffer for you:


Sunbather by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Or not...

 

[Sporgon]

Absolutely loving all the photos being posted showcasing this lens, only thing is guy’s I think your all pushing the price of it up especially you Dustin and I’m still saving, now stop it and post some duffers

+1

I really like what I am seeing here

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Absolutely loving all the photos being posted showcasing this lens, only thing is guy’s I think your all pushing the price of it up especially you Dustin and I’m still saving, now stop it and post some duffers

+1

I really like what I am seeing here

I often zoom into 100% with this lens and my jaw drops (kind of like zooming into a lot of 135L pics). For example, I was practicing AI Servo with the 6D with my cat in the backyard. He stopped for a minute, and here is the full shot out of camera along with the 100% crop

 

[Vivid Color]

Dustin: Great photos!

Question to Dustin and everyone: I have the 70-300L and plan to take it along with my 24-105L on a safari to Tanzania. My bodies will be a 6D and a T1i. I've been trying to decide which lens to put on which body. I was thinking of putting the 70-300L on the T1i for reach to get longer distance animal shots and the 24-105L on the 6D for closer up animal shots and for landscapes. But given Dustin's photos, is that still the best approach? Given the dust in August, I'm going to assume that once I put the lenses on the bodies, they will most likely stay there for each game drive if not the entire day. Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Dustin: Great photos!

Question to Dustin and everyone: I have the 70-300L and plan to take it along with my 24-105L on a safari to Tanzania. My bodies will be a 6D and a T1i. I've been trying to decide which lens to put on which body. I was thinking of putting the 70-300L on the T1i for reach to get longer distance animal shots and the 24-105L on the 6D for closer up animal shots and for landscapes. But given Dustin's photos, is that still the best approach? Given the dust in August, I'm going to assume that once I put the lenses on the bodies, they will most likely stay there for each game drive if not the entire day. Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

reach, reach, reach - 70-300L on the T1i (unless the MFA is off and you don't have time to send it for calibration)

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Dustin: Great photos!

Question to Dustin and everyone: I have the 70-300L and plan to take it along with my 24-105L on a safari to Tanzania. My bodies will be a 6D and a T1i. I've been trying to decide which lens to put on which body. I was thinking of putting the 70-300L on the T1i for reach to get longer distance animal shots and the 24-105L on the 6D for closer up animal shots and for landscapes. But given Dustin's photos, is that still the best approach? Given the dust in August, I'm going to assume that once I put the lenses on the bodies, they will most likely stay there for each game drive if not the entire day. Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

reach, reach, reach - 70-300L on the T1i (unless the MFA is off and you don't have time to send it for calibration)

I think I would have to agree here. If the lens isn't dialed in, then put it on the 6D and dial it in before you. I found a huge difference at 50 ft+ after AFMA. But 300mm isn't very long on FF. The positive is that I find I can do 100% crops and still have nice looking results for web use. Big prints might be another story, though.

 

[clostridium]

With those lenses as another has noted due to the need for more reach you are best to put the 70-300L on the T1i. That reduces the cropping you will be doing but also doesn't put your best lens into use and still isn't enough reach. I'd suggest renting a 100-400 to use on the T1i and have the 70-300 for the 6D to occasionally swap with the 24-105 for either camera (more likely the 6d).

Dustin: Great photos!

Question to Dustin and everyone: I have the 70-300L and plan to take it along with my 24-105L on a safari to Tanzania. My bodies will be a 6D and a T1i. I've been trying to decide which lens to put on which body. I was thinking of putting the 70-300L on the T1i for reach to get longer distance animal shots and the 24-105L on the 6D for closer up animal shots and for landscapes. But given Dustin's photos, is that still the best approach? Given the dust in August, I'm going to assume that once I put the lenses on the bodies, they will most likely stay there for each game drive if not the entire day. Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

I will write a full review of the lens soon, but here's a good, a bad, and an example. The bad is that the lens focus breathes really heavily. I was disappointed at the lower maximum magnification that the 70-300L produces vs. the Tamron 70-300 VC although the Canon has a bit closer minimum focus. I would estimate the focal length at minimum focus to be not much more than 225mm. The good news: the same floating elements that produce that effect also produce very high resolution at minimum focus range (to be fair - I found the Tamron quite good in situations like this, too - just not quite to the Canon's level). Here's an example:


April Showers #1 by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

 

[SpecialGregg]

BEE Awesome.

 

[pgsdeepak]

I recently bought the 70-300L refurb. I should say I am really impressed with the lens. I had the 70-300 Non L, not sure if it was the copy I had, at the longer end, the images were usually soft. I then tried a 100-400L from CPS. that lens was awesome. the push pull feature was a problem initially, but then I got used to it in a few hours. But that was pretty heavy and long. I did not see myself packing it to take it with me most of the times. So I decided to get the 70-300L, heard some good reviews. It is well built, but not so heavy, very hand-holdable, short enough and good glass too. I took it to the zoo and the main thing I have to say about this lens is, it is SHARP!!!!.
It is more versatile on FF Camera on the shorter end.
Some pics below. I used a EOS 40D for all the shots.

 

[candyman]

Great lens