Canon telephoto lens help

[Wes Jordan]

I just ordered a Canon 70-210 f/4 lens, its a push-pull, which I have used and didn't like, and also it doesn't have USM. I was also considering the 75-300 f/ 4-5.6 USM. Which lens should I get? Any suggestions?

[Zeke]

I think the image quality of the 70-210 is supposed to be better (it's the predecessor of the 70-200 f/4 and from what I've seen only lacks in that it doesn't have USM and has push-pull zoom). The 75-300 is not worth the money from what I've read.

[snap58]

Originally Posted by Wes Jordan

I just ordered a Canon 70-210 f/4 lens, its a push-pull, which I have used and didn't like, and also it doesn't have USM. I was also considering the 75-300 f/ 4-5.6 USM. Which lens should I get? Any suggestions?

Does Canon still make a 70 to 210? And if they do why would you order it knowing you don't like push pull and would like USM?

Maybe you should save and get the 70-200 4.0L that you really want?

[Peace]

I have a Canon ultrasonic USM 28-200 f3.5-5.6 and it works pretty good.

[jared_kipe]

the 70-210 is probably better than the 75-300mm. The 75-300mm is a bad lens. But for the price the Sigma 70-300mm APO Macro is a better alternative.

[Wes Jordan]

Originally Posted by snap58

Does Canon still make a 70 to 210? And if they do why would you order it knowing you don't like push pull and would like USM?

Maybe you should save and get the 70-200 4.0L that you really want?

Well the 70-200 f/4 is three times the price and I am leaving for Alaska Friday and can't afford anything else. They did have a Sigma 70-200 or 210 f/2.8 but it was $328, thats how much I spent on my total order (50 f/1.8, battery, a couple of hoods, filter)

See, I used a push-pull Nikon 70-210 f/2.8 and that thing was MASSIVE! Trying to handle it and get used to the zoom mechanism was tough. Plus it wasn't focusing where I wanted and I simply wasn't used to the Nikon camera.

[arogge]

The Canon 70-300 mm f/4-5.6 is a good lens, but the 75-300 is cheap.

[cookie1105]

I don't know about the 70-210mm but I bought a copy of the 75-300mm USM III and it was as soft as a baby's bum. I sold it again 4 weeks after buying it.

[snap58]

Originally Posted by Wes Jordan

Well the 70-200 f/4 is three times the price and I am leaving for Alaska Friday and can't afford anything else. They did have a Sigma 70-200 or 210 f/2.8 but it was $328, thats how much I spent on my total order (50 f/1.8, battery, a couple of hoods, filter)

See, I used a push-pull Nikon 70-210 f/2.8 and that thing was MASSIVE! Trying to handle it and get used to the zoom mechanism was tough. Plus it wasn't focusing where I wanted and I simply wasn't used to the Nikon camera.

Well that's probably what I would do too, Alaska is great, went last September and loved it. I have had good luck with the much belittled 18-55 kit lens, which while it isn't very good at graph paper and wine labels, seems to do a pretty good job outdoors.

I have a push - pull, and while it is not my preferred type, you get use to it. I don't know anything about the 75-300 except some people don't like it. My opinion, almost any modern lens will do a pretty good job stopped down, and most your pictures will be outside in good light, chances are you will take fine pictures. Be sure you have something to download your pictures to or a whole lot of cards, you will take a lot of pictures.

Enjoy the trip, and start saving for the 70-200L 4.0 when you get back.

[jared_kipe]

Originally Posted by Wes Jordan

Well the 70-200 f/4 is three times the price and I am leaving for Alaska Friday and can't afford anything else. They did have a Sigma 70-200 or 210 f/2.8 but it was $328, thats how much I spent on my total order (50 f/1.8, battery, a couple of hoods, filter)

See, I used a push-pull Nikon 70-210 f/2.8 and that thing was MASSIVE! Trying to handle it and get used to the zoom mechanism was tough. Plus it wasn't focusing where I wanted and I simply wasn't used to the Nikon camera.

Dude what shop was that? Thats an amazing price for the S 70-200mm f2.8, even if its not the newer Macro or DG lens.

[davegoody]

Originally Posted by arogge

The Canon 70-300 mm f/4-5.6 is a good lens, but the 75-300 is cheap.

the

[davegoody]

Originally Posted by arogge

The Canon 70-300 mm f/4-5.6 is a good lens, but the 75-300 is cheap.

I use the 28-300L and it is a SUPERB lens - it also uses the PushPull zoom but I find it excellent and quick to focus. VERY sharp across the range. Price is expensive £1700 in the UK - but IMHO worth every penny !

[Wes Jordan]

That lens was at Adorama in the used department, it might still be there, I would buy it if I had the money. It will make someone happy.

I think I will grow used to the lens. I also ordered the iPod camera connector, so I should be set for the trip, I am very excited.

[Wes Jordan]

I checked and that lens IS still available. I am posting a link, http://www.adorama.com/US%20%20%20%20220547.html. Only $324! Sigma 70-210 2.8 Apo Af F/eos W/cs *82, excellent + condition. I have always been very happy with Adorama. I am not affiliated with them in any way, but I have placed a few orders with them.

[jared_kipe]

Originally Posted by Wes Jordan

That lens was at Adorama in the used department, it might still be there, I would buy it if I had the money. It will make someone happy.

I think I will grow used to the lens. I also ordered the iPod camera connector, so I should be set for the trip, I am very excited.

Good luck with the ipod camera connector. That thing is abysmally slow.

[jared_kipe]

Originally Posted by Wes Jordan

I checked and that lens IS still available. I am posting a link, http://www.adorama.com/US%20%20%20%20220547.html. Only $324! Sigma 70-210 2.8 Apo Af F/eos W/cs *82, excellent + condition. I have always been very happy with Adorama. I am not affiliated with them in any way, but I have placed a few orders with them.

Ahh it not a 70-200mm, don't know about its quality, but you can probably kiss HSM goodbye.