Which one would you choose and why? I am a beginner and need some advice. I hear the 100-300 is sharper, but 70-300 has IS. Any opinions are welcome.

-- Angela Weeks (GPDMTR25@aol.com), January 15, 2002

Answers

Angela,

I owned 'em both and they're about the same optically: sharp on the short end and a little softer at the long end. The 100-300 USM is a much better design: rippin' fast ring-type USM, FT-M, distance window and a bit smaller. The 75-300 IS design sucks: painfully slow AF, no distance window and no FT-M. Of course, the IS feature is wonderful. Both of them are built very plasticky and light duty. So, it depends on what features are the most important to you. I'd say it's a draw between the two lenses, but I liked the 100-300 USM a little more.

I sold 'em both and got the EF 70-200 4L USM. It is an incredible optic, head and shoulders above the two other telezooms in terms of optical quality, build quality and design. If you're willing spend $450 for the 75-300 IS, I'd spend a $100 more and get the EF 70-200 4L USM. There's a $100 rebate in the USA if you buy it by 1/31/02.

-- Puppy Face (doggieface@aol.com), January 16, 2002.

I've not used the 75-300 IS, but I have used the 100-300 and I own the 70-200 F4L. It's a bit of an unfair comparison, and there's a great deal of difference between 200mm and 300mm.

Since your previous question on this forum was about the 300 F4L IS and the 100-400 IS, I presume you want at least 300mm, and the two L series lenses are a little on the expensive side.

Optically, my guess would be that the 100-300 USM is better at 300mm (the example I used was very good for a consumer zoom), but the 75- 300 may make up for that in many situations with IS. Certainly my feeling these days is that I won't buy another lens that does not have ring-type USM, so my choice would be the 100-300 USM.

But then puppy face throws the 70-200 F4L USM into the pot. Sure, no IS, but the optics of this lens blow away the other two, and it is also a stop faster. Build is better two, and focus is superbly quick when using the limiter. The extra stop on the lens means you can drop a stop on the film, and then if you enlarge the central portion to bring it to the same magnification as a 300mm would have provided, you'll probably get better quality than with either of the 300mm zooms mentioned. And, of course, the 70-200 is canon teleconverter compatible, and I have had some lovely results from mine with the 1.4X TC.

So my choice would be (and was, and I'm very happy) the 70-200 F4L. If you're in the US, Adorama will supply the lens for $630, and then you can get a $100 rebate. $530 for a lens of this quality...bargain!

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), January 16, 2002.

http://www.photo.net/photo/nature/x-300

-- Steve Dunn (steved@ussinc.com), January 16, 2002.