New lens help

[whittaker52]

I was just wondering if someone might be able to help me? Ive recently purchased a Canon EOS 20D with the 17-85mm IS USM lens, and im looking to get a new lens for the up-coming motorsport season.

The lens im look at are -
EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III USM,
EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM,
or EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM.

The only thing really putting me off the IS lenses, is the fact they are over double the price of the normal lens, and essentially they have the same spec (except from the IS of course). Are the IS lenses worth the extra cash?

Any thoughts welcome.
Thanks in advance,
Oliver

[simpo two]

Nine pages dedicated to the theory of lenses, including IS:

www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=241616&f=109&h=0

[UKBob]

www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showcat.php?cat=27

check the second page too. Youve got dozens of reviews on each lens, from the owners.

[ehasler]

UKBob said:

www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showcat.php?cat=27 check the second page too. Youve got dozens of reviews on each lens, from the owners.

I thought you were banned until you come back with a DSLR?

[Tuna]

UKBob said:

www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showcat.php?cat=27 check the second page too. Youve got dozens of reviews on each lens, from the owners.

Beware FredMiranda reviews. Whilst some posters are professional photographers, it seems quite a few (most?) are the usual mixture of inexperienced consumers. As a result, reviews are either biased, poorly written or just plain inaccurate. 'Difficult lenses' (ie. ones that encourage very shallow depth of field, or are quite dark) usually get a good number of reviews from people who just don't have the experience to know whether the lens is faulty or their technique is wrong.

[monkeyhanger]

Tuna said:

UKBob said: www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showcat.php?cat=27 check the second page too. Youve got dozens of reviews on each lens, from the owners. Beware FredMiranda reviews. Whilst some posters are professional photographers, it seems quite a few (most?) are the usual mixture of inexperienced consumers. As a result, reviews are either biased, poorly written or just plain inaccurate. 'Difficult lenses' (ie. ones that encourage very shallow depth of field, or are quite dark) usually get a good number of reviews from people who just don't have the experience to know whether the lens is faulty or their technique is wrong.

A simple scan of a few of the reviewer's other posts will tell you if their opinion is valid or not.

If a lens has an overwhelming number of either good or bad reviews, you can bet it's a good indication of quality. If the reviews are mixed, just dig a bit further.

[Andy M]

Of the lenses you've mentioned, I've heard most good reports on the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

IIRC the IS is the latest version as well.

[robdickinson]

I;'ve been looking at thse a bit.

Have a 70-200f4L to play with for now which is just a little more pricey than the 70-300IS.

Knowing someone with one of the 75-300's and seeing the reviews avoid the 75-300's

The 70-300IS is excelent and almost as good as the L I have, it does have a bit of a problem sometimes in portrait over 200mm but I think lattre versions should be a lot better.

3 drawbacks over the F4L is poor construction, rotating front element(no ndgrads) and no full time manual focus.

[poah]

the brandnew 70-300 IS USM lens is very good although they appear to have a problem when taking portrait orrientation shots. it is quite an expensive lens though

[whittaker52]

I will use this lens for pretty much all motorsport shots, so i dont think the portrait issue would come into it really. After reading a few reviews, its looking very much like the 70-300 IS USM lens. I was also looking at the 70-200 F4 L USM lens, but im not sure it will really have the reach that im after in a lens, although in terms of price, its not much more than the 70-300 IS USM.
Any other suggestions most welcome though.
Thanks once again for all the feedback so far.

[robdickinson]

200mm on 1.6 bodies is 320mm, the 300 is 480mm.

Another option is the sigma 70-200 f2.8 , a cracking piece of kit if a bit big and heavy, same price as the canon f4 L. can be used with a 1.4 or 2.0 tele convertor too and still be reasonably fast.

Get a monopod with the 70-300IS and use mode 2 IS for paning.

[LongQ]

whittaker52 said:

I will use this lens for pretty much all motorsport shots, so i dont think the portrait issue would come into it really.

Portrait ORIENTATION - i.e. rather than Landscape. Unusual in the main for motorsport shots but can be quite handing in the pits and does give some variation from the norm so it is worth considering IMO. That said there may be something simple that can be set to overcome most problems - if anyone can find it!

Given that my SLR's are all manual focus I don't claim any great knowledge on this. Except to say that the well used 600mm f4.5 Canon FD lense I picked up recently does seem to produce some absolutely cracking negatives even with ISO 400 High Street film. So I guess you do get what you pay so much for in the world of photographic optics.

[whittaker52]

Thanks for all the help and advice, its been very much appreciated. I managed to sort of getting a lens today while i was at the Focus on Imaging show. In the end i decided to go for the 70-300mm IS USM, especially with the deal being so good. After having a quick try with the lens this afternoon, it proves to have an extremely good range (from 112mm to 480mm on the 20D), and the image stabaliser seems to work extremely well too. I would say my only issue would be that the USM motor seems a bit noisey, but other than that, it seems like a fantastic piece of kit. Hopefully i'll get to give it a proper test in the next few weeks, so i'll report back then, hopefully with a few shots

Thanks again for the help,
Oliver

[RobDickinson]

Is it the USM motor thats noisy or the IS, I've heard that lens is noisy in the audiable way...

Also have you taken portrait test shots at 300mm vs landscape and noticed a difference?

This may be my telephoto of choice and I've heard the soft portrait issues have been reduced somewhat on new copies.

[whittaker52]

Ive just done a quick test, and it seems that its the IS making the noise, and not the USM motor. Ive also shot some photos this morning at both portrait and landscape of the same subject using the 70-300mm IS USM, but as a bit of a comparison, ive also shot a few on my 17-85mm IS USM. I will get them uploaded and post them this afternoon as a comparison.

[whittaker52]

Ive uploaded the photos to my fotopics account - http://oliverwhittaker6200.fotopic.ne

When you click into each picture, you should find a button at the bottom to allow you to see the full size shots.

Just having a quick look at the photos, i didnt really notice any issues with any of the shots taken with the 70-300mm lens, they look equally as good as the shots taken with the 17-85mm lens.