Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

[squarepumpkin]

Hi all, I'm looking to get something that offers a little more range than my 70-200 but still maintain compact and lightweight. The EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS seems to fit the bill nicely and is affordable for me. Problem is, there are very little user information available around. Anybody here using it? Any comments appreciated. Thanks.

[hwchoy]

check the "whats your set up" thread. someone recently posted this item in their kitty.

[Michael]

It is a good but stubby lens...

[Nick]

Green Ring! 

[Denosha]

Used my friend's one while shooting the F1 powerboats a couple of years back. Not worth the $$$. It's soft, especially at 300mm and the IS isn't that effective (probably the 1.5G one?).

[jediforce4ever]

Tried this lens briefly before too.If you're shooting wider than f10, the photos are soft.For something of its price, you would expect much more.Its not worth the money.
How bout the 70-300IS?Though its bigger than the DO, its weight is still comparable.And it aint much bigger either.

[squarepumpkin]

Hmmm... thanks!! I did thought of the 70-300 IS but somehow, had the impression that the DO will be better. Don't think I want to buy anything that will perform only when stopped down to f10 or beyond. Size and weight aside, think the 100-400 is good? Thanks.

[victor]

100-400 lens have mixed reviews...you need to know and like the push pull function.

[jediforce4ever]

Actually, the 100-400 is a good lens, provided you get a good copy.
It seems that the QC of the lens is somewhat bad, and while some copies are sharp wide open, some are only sharp when stopped down.
If you get a good and sharp copy, I'd say this lens is one you should go for if you're aiming to extend your reach in focal length.

Just curious, are you considering third party lenses?

[squarepumpkin]

100-400 lens have mixed reviews...you need to know and like the push pull function.

Don't have problem with push/pull since I'll be using it on a tripod most of the time. All the time in the world to set up the shot.

[squarepumpkin]

Actually, the 100-400 is a good lens, provided you get a good copy.
It seems that the QC of the lens is somewhat bad, and while some copies are sharp wide open, some are only sharp when stopped down.
If you get a good and sharp copy, I'd say this lens is one you should go for if you're aiming to extend your reach in focal length.

Just curious, are you considering third party lenses?

Definitely not considering 3rd party as my luck with them hasn't been good. Can you imagine I broke a so called "built like a tank" Tokina 12-24 into 2 pieces? 

[squarepumpkin]

Well, another alternative is just to get a 2x extender for the 70-200?

[jediforce4ever]

I guess you drove a tank over the 12-24.heh

I wouldn't go for a TC with the 70-200.It is SOFT.Lack details and contrast is lost.

[squarepumpkin]

Hmmm.... how ah? Seems like the only choice is the 70-300 IS?

[Michael]

eh, wasn't that what u were asking? 70-300 IS?
it's fast focusing and cheap.
Swimaniac uses it...