Zoom lens

[slat]

I'm looking at getting a zoom in the 70-300mm range. I have been looking at a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens but I know that there is a newer version in the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM Lens. Is it really that much better? I'm open to third party lenses too. Just wanted to know what others thoughts are and if anyone uses any of these lenses?

 

[Derrel]

A review of the earlier version of the lens is here: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens Review

and here is their review of the II version. Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM Lens Review

 

[slat]

From reading those reviews it looks like the older one is just slightly better than the new one.
Any thoughts on a Sigma or Tamron 100-400? I might be willing to stretch the budget if these are better lenses?

 

[ac12]

There are times when you just need more reach, and the longer lens gives it to you.
Then there is the discussion of a longer lens vs. cropping into the pix. This is more of an issue if the longer lens is not significantly longer, then cropping is a decent alternative. If you are going to crop into the pix, you need a lens that is GOOD at the long end, to handle cropping into the pix.

Example, I've cropped into a frame by 50%, so effectively getting a 400mm FoV out of a 200mm lens. The lens was good enough that in that 50% crop, I could see easily see the iris clearly in the person's eye. I have another lens that could barely do that.​

There is a definite price jump going longer than 70-300.

The Sigma and Tamron 100-400 are close enough to the $1k mark that I would look at the Sigma or Tamron 150-600, if you need REACH.
But the 150-600 is a bigger and heavier lens.

For long shots, the Sigma 100-400 does not have a tripod mount. So you have to put it on a bean bag.
The Tamron 100-400, has tripod mount, but it is a $125 option :-( There are much cheaper Chinese tripod mounts, but I don't know how well they fit. The reviews have been mixed.
Since I DO use the tripod mount on my LONG lenses, I would go with the Tamron 100-400, over the Sigma which does not have the option of a tripod mount.

BTW there are discussions on not needing a tripod mount on the 70-300 or 100-400 lenses because they have IS.
What the people do not consider is, holding up the gear for a LONG period of time, is really hard on the body. So simply taking the weight off your arms is important. The longer the shoot, the more important this is. And the older you get, the more important it is as well.