Canon 70-200 f4 IS vs 70-300 f4.5-5.6 DO IS

Iron Flatline · Nov 16, 2006

Ok, I'm back with a lens comparison question. Hannukah is around the corner, and I still owe myself something nice from the last time.

I've asked plenty of questions about the 70-200 products, and have decided the only relevant one for me is the new 4.0 IS. But I've bumped into a different lens, called the 70-300 DO. Below are the links:

EF70-200mm f/4L IS USM

vs.

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

The 70-300 may not be quite as sharp, but it has a good speed and some good range.

I like shooting in cities, so the shorter 70-300 might actually be easier to carry around. I enjoy long exposures with tripods at night, and sharpness DOES matter for those kinds of images.

Who's got experience with the 70-300 DO, and who has comments in general? Is there a third-party manufacturer that I should be seriously considering?

Alex_B · Nov 16, 2006

i would be interested as well in that comparison.

on my last trip to mexico i really did regret not having my lens collection extended into the tele range ... 105 mm was just not enough for some wildlife or some architectural details ....

Big Mike · Nov 16, 2006

F5.6 at 300mm is not too fast...although the IS will help.

I haven't heard too much about Canon's DO optics...and if they any better or not.

The 70-200 F4L IS...is an L lens...so you get weather sealing and top of the line build quality and image quality...plus you get that cool red ring on the front of the lens.

Sorry...you probably know all this...I can't really help.

Alex_B · Nov 16, 2006

well, if you have more than one red ring, you might want to add some diversity and start with green rings

Iron Flatline · Nov 16, 2006

The DO line (with its Green ring) does seem to be a cut or two above their regular lenses, and is certainly priced like L glass.

I like the compact nature of it, which would make it much easier for me to travel with. I am abroad A LOT (between Europe and the US at least every 14 days) and these two lenses, a body, plus some batteries, etc would fit into a small camera bag (my small LowePro Sling.) The lens is about the size of my 24-70mm L, whereas the 70-200mm 4.0 is twic as long.

Iron Flatline · Nov 24, 2006

OMG, I did it. I'm in NY, so I walked down to B&H and bought a 70-200 IS 1:28 L.

It's a monster. It weighs as much as my 3-year old son... well, not quite, but dang it's big.

I allowed myself to be totally sold on it. I basically wanted it anyway, but every guy there (either side of the counter) took time out to tell me to get the 2.8.

They paused - on Black Friday!

I have a week or so to return it - or in my case exchange it for the IS 4.

Took a look at the 70-300 DO and definitely don't like it much. I thought the green ring was cool though.

Wish me luck!