cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Eos 30D w/ 75-300mm vs Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS ?

Saluki
Enthusiast

The Eos 30D I purchased used came with an older 75-300mm lens. Reviews seem to rate the newer 70-300mm w/ IS as a much better lens. But how much better? Also, the 70-300 is full frame - would that work with my older 30D? 

14 REPLIES 14

jrhoffman75
Legend
Legend

Both of the lenses you mentioned will work on your 30D. They are also compatible with newer full-frame EF mount DSLRs.

There are several versions of the Canon EF75-300mm lens. None of them were noted for image quality.

The newer 70-300 IS Mk II lens is superior.

But depending on your use case it may not be noticeable. What are you doing with your images? If you are posting on Instagram or the like or emailing to family and friends the 75-300 would probably be adequate. If you are ordering 16x20 wall prints not so much.

Use your current lens for a while and study your images. If they are acceptable to you keep what you have.

That would be my advice. 

John Hoffman
Conway, NH

1D X Mark III, M200, Many lenses, Pixma PRO-100, Pixma TR8620a, Lr Classic

Saluki
Enthusiast

Thank you - will use the 75-300 into the spring and see how the images go.  I like to shoot birds and wildlife so spring should give me plenty of opportunity to see what's what.

 

The number one reason to switch from the 75 to 300 to the 70 to 300 is the Image Stabilization. AFAIK, none of the 75 - 300's had it. You will find it really helps at long reach for birds and wildlife.

ebiggs1
Legend
Legend

Newer tech is usually better than older.  If it is that much better is up to you. Newer lens vs older newer should be, you expect it to be, better.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

Tronhard
Elite
Elite

If you want a serious and comprehensive review with samples of the 70-300mm focal range, refer to my post: HERE 


cheers, TREVOR

"The Amount of Misery expands to fill the space available"
"All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris

Saluki
Enthusiast

Looking to improve sharpness over my 75-300 for shooting birds and wildlife. Thus far it seems that the  EF 70-300 F4.0-5.6 IS II USM may be the way to go. Came across the EF 70-300 F/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM. Is this also a viable alternative?

I would not recommend the DO lens. The 70-300 USM II lens is a better choice. 

John Hoffman
Conway, NH

1D X Mark III, M200, Many lenses, Pixma PRO-100, Pixma TR8620a, Lr Classic


@Saluki wrote:

"Looking to improve sharpness over my 75-300 for shooting birds and wildlife. Thus far it seems that the  EF 70-300 F4.0-5.6 IS II USM may be the way to go. Came across the EF 70-300 F/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM. Is this also a viable alternative?"


When I first moved to DSLR, it was the 12MP Rebel XSi, which is a litlle more advanced than your 8MP 30D, which has the Digic II processor compared to the Digic III of the XSi, but still close enough for a comparison, IMO. I remember the big difference it made in my images when switching to the EF 70-300mm from the EF 75-300mm mark III. The EF 75-300 III was a big improvement over the EF 75-300 and 75-300 mark II, but I didn't see how bad they ALL were until I switched to the EF 70-300. So, IMO, you WILL se a difference if you just go to the EF 70-300. I only used the XSi for a couple of years before switching to the Rebel T4i and only used the EF 70-300mm with the T4i for a very short time, then moved to the EF 70-300mm L, which was a game changer for me. I actually had sharp images. I agree to steer clear of the "DO". My wife bought the 70-300mm mark II and used it on the T4i after I went to the EOS 7D mark II and the EOS 5D mark IV and moved to the EF 100-400mm L. She eventually moved to the Rebel T7i, then the EOS R6 and continued to use the EF 70-300mm mark II (with adapter on the R6) as she upgraded. My point is (finally) that the EF 70-300 mark II worked well with the newer cameras, so it's kind of an investment that will stay with you a while if you go with it and plan to move up the camera chain. No, it's not "L" quality, but still a fine lens. I bought "L" glass early on and that's all I use now, but my wife still uses the non L budget lenses. She now uses the RF 100-400mm on the R6, but the 70-300 II has a home on the T7i. We use all of our cameras and have them stationed at windows around the house, so we are never too far from one of them. BTW, we are bird photographers. I'm using the EOS R5 and the RF 100-500mm L, now that's a birding rig 🙂

Newton

Newton's comments are very apropos.  As I indicated in my reviews of Canon EF 70-300mm lenses HERE: any one of them is a vast improvement over the 75-300 range (all of them).  So, a lot depends on your budget and intentions. 

If you are staying with the camera you currently have and funds are tight, the MkI version of the 70-300 (a contemporary lens released in 2006) does a great job (do refer to my review and images), if you intend to upgrade to a better body in the future and if your budget allows, the MkII version (2014) is the way to go. Definitely avoid the DO model - it's expensive and not as good as any of the EF 70-300 versions. 

I still have all three EF 70-300 lenses and, piqued by this discussion, I actually shot with the MkI version today, on a Canon EOS 650D (Rebel T4i) (APS-C) body 18MP, circa 2012 - so, there you go! 
Downsized in Photoshop to meet site requirements.

650D_1194 copy.jpgCanon EOS 650D, EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM MkI: 263mm, f/9, 1/400sec, ISO-200


cheers, TREVOR

"The Amount of Misery expands to fill the space available"
"All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris
Avatar
click here to view the gallery
Announcements