Which has better optics. As far as I know all the three versions of 70-300 has similar optical quality. Is it better than the old 70-210. Please help.

Thanks

-- sajeev (chack74@yahoo.co.in), March 10, 2002

Answers

Assuming you mean 75-300...

Then the next question is which 70-210? There was a 70-210 F4, which was a push-pull AFD lens, which I don't recall as ever being regarded as particularly stellar. Then there was the highly-rated 70- 210 F3.5-4.5 USM, which was a USM lens, very similar in design to the 100-300 USM.

Personally, I would definately go for the 70-210 USM, as this had a good reputation. I suppose the modern (and somewhat more superior still) equivalent is the 70-200 F4L, which I have.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), March 10, 2002.

thanks isaac. oh yes. its 75-300 i wanted to mention.

well, which one would you go for isaac. as you said there are two versions of 70-210 with F4 and F3.5-4.5 of which the former is not very good. but you have 70-200 F4. so could you please make it more clear exactly which i should i go for the F4 or F3.5-4.5.

Also one more question. Is the maximum focal length of 70-210 equal (or close enough) to 210mm. Geoff Doane, here on this forum said that a a 30-180mm lens can be sold as a 28-200, and still be within 10% . how much is this true in case of 70-210mm lens (both F4 and F3.5-4.5 versions). that doesn't matter much for me. but just as a matter of fact, i could like to know about it.

thanks

-- sajeev (chack74@yahoo.co.in), March 10, 2002.

A quick reference to photodo, and I can answer your question.

The 70-210 F4 is rated at 2.8, and is tested as an effective length of 71-200.

The 70-210 F3.5-4.5 is rated at 3.1, and is tested as an effective length of 72-207.

Bearing in mind that the 70-210 F3.5-4.5 has USM and twist zoom, it would definately be my choice over the older 70-210 F4. I did, for a while, consider buying the 70-210 F3.5-4.5 USM, but then the price of the 70-200 F4L which I really wanted dropped into the realms of the surprisingly affordable.

If you can't stretch to the 70-200 F4L, then go for the 70-210 USM.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), March 10, 2002.

Sorry, just to add, and make things completely clear...

There are three lenses we're talking about in the 70-200/210 range. The 70-210 F3.5-4.5 USM, the old 70-210 F4, and the lens which I own, which is the present, white, 70-200 F4L USM, which is very different to the others, being L series, and it never changes size (either focus or zoom).

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), March 10, 2002.

thanks a lot isaac. i will go for the f3.5-4.5 one.

-- sajeev (chack74@yahoo.co.in), March 10, 2002.

Sajeev, I own both the EF 70-210 3.5-4.5 USM and the EF 70-200 4L USM. While the L series is certainly a better lens than the EF 70-210 3.5-4.5 USM optically and mechanically, the EF 70-210 3.5-4.5 USM is still an excellent optic. I feel that Photodo may have tested a poor sample as my EF 70-210 3.5-4.5 USM is very sharp. In fact, stopped down to F8 or F11 the chromes from both lenses are impossible to tell apart with a 10X loupe. Wide open, the L series zoom is much better. Of course, the EF 70-210 3.5-4.5 USM is lighter and more compact than the L series version. It also has a noticeable amount of extra reach at the long end (my L series zoom falls very short of 200 mm). Amazingly it also focuses a little faster than the L zoom (the small rear element group really rips). I wrote a short review ofthe the EF 70-210 3.5-4.5 USM if you're interested:

http:// alaike.lcc.hawaii.edu/frary/toolbox2.htm

-- Puppy Face (doggieface@aol.com), March 10, 2002.

I would say that puppy face is a lot better placed than I to answer the question, since he owns the lens. His point about the L series lens being shorter is indeed evidenced by photodo's test, which gives a length of 71-190. Certainly the 70-210 F3.5-4.5 USM has an excellent reputation, which is probably well deserved.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), March 10, 2002.