Well, I ordered an EOS 3 today to replace my A2. And, I was planning on getting a 100-400L IS, but those plans have fallen through.

Now, I'd like to get the 75-300 IS, but I've heard of sharpness problems at 300 5.6. I read in an older thread here that it's only soft compared maybe to a prime, but not other consumer lenses. I like to shoot wildlife, and I use the 200-300 range alot.

I am used to the quality of a Sigma 70-300 DL. Will I see an improvement at 300mm with the Canon over the Sigma? or, does anyone have any other suggestions under $600 or so? What about the Sigma 100-300 f/4?

Thanks!

Dan

-- Dan Shallenberger (dshallenberger@cinci.rr.com), February 03, 2002

Answers

I've done sharpness tests with the Canon 75-300, 75-300 USM, 75-300 USM IS, and the Sigma 70-300 DL as well as some others in this range. My experience is that all these Canon's are just a bit sharper than the Sigma 70-300 DL at the long end, but the Sigma 70- 300 APO was just a bit sharper than the Canon's. All differences were in small increments & usually wouldn't be noticeable.

The older Canon 100-300 f/5.6 that I tested was sharper than either of these, and the 100-300 f/5.6L was considerably sharper still. That "L" version was still being closed out at B&H Photo for $330 the last I checked. Both of these are large & clunky old push-pull designs with rather slow AF, but the image quality is better.

I've never tried the Sigma 100-300 f/4 but have heard that it is pretty good. Tamron or Tokina has one as well & is reported to be better.

-- Jim Strutz (j.strutz@gci.net), February 03, 2002.

The EF 75-300 IS USM is ok, but not great. Yes, the 300 end is slightly soft, but good enough for nice 11 x 14 enlargements if you use a tripod and fine grained film. The IS feature is outstanding--I really gained 2-3 stops of handholding ability. The AF motor is weak and slow, but is ok for normal one shot use. Unfortunately, mine burned out twice in a year while using AI Servo shooting bodyboarders. I too found I mainly used the long end of the zoom so I bought a used EF 300 4L USM and the AI Servo is much better and appears bulletproof (the lens is also much sharper).

However, there is an issue with the cross AF sensors and slow zooms with the EOS 3 & 1V: they don't work as a cross but degrade to simple horizontal sensitivity only. For me, this meant my EF 75-300 IS USM racked back and forth a lot.

However, there is a pretty good fix. The EOS 3 has a custom function to expand the AF area and vastly improve AF performance with slow lenses. CF 17-2 expands the AF points by one sensor vertically and 2 sensors horizontally. If you use slow zooms, this setting makes a night and day difference in AF performance! In normal AF mode (CF 17-0), my EF 28-135 IS USM and EF 75-300 IS USM are unreliable. With CF 17-2 set, the lens locks on to almost anything. Too bad it took me a year to figure this out!

-- Puppy Face (doggieface@aol.com), February 03, 2002.

For $600 or so you have some rather superior options available.

A second-hand 300F4L would be an excellent choice, and would allow you to add a 1.4X TC later, for 420mm F5.6, still with excellent optical performance (even with the TC it will be far superior to the 75-300 at any length).

Another good choice would be the 70-200 F4L. I appreciate that you want the range above 200mm, and you could add a 1.4X TC to get 98- 280 F5.6 (And I've had some fine results from this lens/TC combo...definately better than my old Sigma 70-300 APO which was mentioned above as being better than the canon 75-300). Of course, the TC adds to the price quite considerably, but I will also add that, with an appropriately good film, an enlargement from the 200mm end of the 70-200F4L will be as good (if not better than) a non- enlarged shot from the 300mm end of the 75-300.

Of course, if you get the 70-200 F4L, it would make a great combo to later pick up the 300 F4L as well, and with the 1.4X TC that gives you great quality coverage from 70 to 420mm. I use a 70-200F4L, 1.4X TC and the 300 F4L IS, and I very much like the combo. My father has the 100-400L IS, which is a fine lens, but I don't feel the desire to swap.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), February 03, 2002.

Referring to Jim's answer,i've also read a test in 'Practical Photography'about them,which shows that the DL is sharper than the APO (even the testors don't know why). I would like to know how did Jim conduct the tests? What is 'a bit'? Any quantitative analysis,the magazine i mentioned probides MTF figures and things alike

-- legnum (legnum212@email.com), February 04, 2002.

The answer to that lies in the testing methodology of the magazines. They tend to test a single sample of the lens. It may be that they got a very good DL, and a very poor APO, so the DL turned out better.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), February 04, 2002.

None of the xx-300 zooms are great at 300mm wide open. Except the L- series model. Even though they are not great, they do a pretty good job and the IS is a nice option. Under $600? A used 300/4L may be in this range but it won't have IS (the IS version would be more than $600). The 100-300/5.6L is currently cheap but it's kind of clunky. The 100-300/4.5-5.6 is an okay lens but no IS.

You probably should have kept the A2 and bought the 100-400 but since you didn't, look for a used 300/4 or go with one of the Canon xx- 300's. Put the outfit on a tripod, load with fine grain slide film, stop down the aperture a bit under beautiful light conditions and you will get excellent results.

-- Lee (Leemarthakiri@sport.rr.com), February 06, 2002.