Cannon also makes a EF 75-300 lll USM lens($217) it does NOT have image stabilizer. Is it worth it to get this lens for $679!? Be specific. Thanks
207491
After 120 mm focal lenght is very dificult to shot good pictures without tripod or monopod because de hand shake makes blur it. The image stabilizer can help you to use the camera in your hands in long focal lenghts about 120mm to 300mm. If you don't have problem with to use a monopod with this lens keep the non IS lens, but if you want to use your camera in your hands is necesary de Image Satablilization.
207492
Yes and no. The EF 75-300mm IS USM is a much better quality lens. You get what you pay for. If you intend to use the lens without a tripod then you would absolutely need the image stabilization. That said, I would look at refurbished lenses on the Canon website. You can get this lens for $519.99. I purchased one from there and I am totally happy with the purchase. Hope this helps.
124500
Jamie, I had the same question. Truth be told I don't have the Canon version. I am interning this summer with one of the nation's best commercial photographers and I asked him. He told me that the Canon lens is built a little better but he has both and he uses both. He told me I wouldn't be disappointed in this lens and I haven't been.
130214
Can someone comment on how this is different from a "tilt-shift" lens costing hundreds of dollars more? I want to get into the realm of architectural photography, and have been told a tilt-shift is something good to have, but they also mentioned LensBaby.
1380194
I purchased this lens for my husband. He wanted a fixed lens, not a zoom. It takes great pictures. However, the Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS USM looks like a beautiful lens, and if this is your first, perhaps it is more versatile for your needs.
1481700
this lens does not have image stabilization. however, the canon 100mm f2.8l (make sure you're looking at the "L" series one) has great image stabilization. however, it's $1,000.00. :-(
435061
This is a fantastic lens! I have never had an issue with image stabilization when using this lens. I love the versatility and range of the lens. I have one of the original Rebel's and also a newer model.I use this as an all purpose lens. At one time I had a 100-400 range canon lens and found that a terrible choice for convenience and for stability. That prompted me to get the Tameron lens and I have never looked back. I also bought one for my daughter who has the rebel xti and it is the only lens she uses as well.
1413084
You lose very little with this lens vds 70-200. The gain is the extra reach and wide angle, it a major upgrade. Having said that , and given the high $$$, I'd wait for the new model. New Model? I suspect so. Everyone, including Canon, is 'out-of-stock'. Couple that with Canon's receent announcment (July 2009) that they have a new IS that will be in 'interchangable' lenses by the end of 2009, it is not a surprise they stopped producing the 28-300mm so they could clear out the stock.I use the XTi- 40D and now the 5D mark II. The glass makes the picture.
1919196
This is not a photography lense. It has no image stabilizer nor auto focus because those aren't used in film making. What makes it a "cine" lense is the gears on the lense intended to match a follow focus - a device on movie camera rigs that allows you to focus the camera manually without actually touching the lense. As a film making lense this is very nice. Cine lenses made by Canon or other major manufacturers usually cost in th $4000 - $10000 range. If you are not really looking to make films this not the lense for you, though.
963336
2 trips, 4000+ shots on D7000 and another 2000 on D3x and any problems I had where my fault! Lens is a great lens, saves carrying more lenses than I need. From action to kids, just cannot be beat. I've had literally every lens made by Nikon, even a $36000 f4 160-600mm zoom lens weighting approximately 15+#'s and now I just carry the 28-300 everywhere above the water. Wish the len's was a f2! Then I'd be really be Camera Happy! Alaska, Eastern Caribbean, cannot insert any pictures, shot everything from Whales to Bears and Eagles to Moose. Getting another one for my wife.
1376191
The real problem is that the 17-55 f/2.8 lens is close to what every one wants but not quite there so people are disappointed with it. What dose every one looking at this lens really want? A real standard zoom L lens for ASP-C Bodies. Something with the same build/optical quality and features as the 24-70 f/2.8L, but with a focal length range that provides the same coverage on a ASP-C body. Something like 15mm on the wide end and like 45mm at the telephoto end. Since this lens doesn't exist people are forced the buy the next closest thing. Which is the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. Quite frankly for the build quality the 17-55 f/2.8 is way over priced and already in the same price bracket as an L lens. Which is why people expect same quality and then are dissatisfied when the build quality isn't much better then the kit lens. I don't see why canon doesn't just make an L version of the 17-55mm f/2.8 and sell it for like $1200-$1500. Especially considering the existence of the 7D, which is basically a pro-level ASP-C body. Oh wait I know, It's to force people who want/need to have L lens quality with decent wide coverage to upgrade to a full frame camera.
1732773
Really good actually better than it is for stills (a little) but phenomenal for the price! You will not see the quality in this lens in any other even close to its price range...
1974760
No stabilization. However, you would not really need it unless you are planning on shooting with very small apertures, in which case I'm not sure why one would buy this lens. This is an absolutely phenomenal lens BTW.
1611414
I have had both versions of the lens and definitely preferred the one with IS. With that said, the difference in price is significant and the non-stabilized version produces superb images. If you are shooting outdoors with plenty of light it is perfect. If light is an issue when shooting I would definitely save up for the IS version.
435055
I wouldn't be so worried about the image stabilization as I would about the overall auto focusing capabilities of this lens. For a new photographer and first time DSLR user, you might find that it's hard to take focused images, especially indoors. I am an experienced photographer and bought this lens to have an 'all-in-one' option for traveling, for times I didn't want to bring my entire gear bag out. The focus was so horrible I sold the lens to a pawn shop. I would highly recommend spending a bit more money and purchasing the Canon equivalent.
349708
Todd-I've talked to a few professional photographers and semi-professionals and they've all said the same thing...the XT is an excellent camera and the differences between the two are not worth the extra money. Buy the XT and invest in a good lens. Those with "is usm" have autofocus and image stabilization. By chance, have you ever ordered a camera through Amazon before? I'm wondering if it will contain the original USA Warranty.Thanks and Good Luck!
692355
Great lens man, its very stable and fluid; I find it to be incredibly helpful for wides as well as shots in tighter. No buyers regret at all. Get this lens!! It is far more versatile with a full frame for sure. And good luck on your project! Would love to hear about it! Connect with me through facebook at facebook.com/ryan.monolopolus . Take care!!
457549
It will become available on or about 3/22...Given the fact that most ultrazooms tend to get shaky at far range of the zoom even with the image stablization built in to reduce it. I would have to read reviews before plunking down $429. I have owned ultrazooms put out by Panasonic Lumix and Olympus and they all have that problem. If this problem has been resolved and a tripod to steady the image is no longer necessary, I would consider buying it and adding it to my collection. Read the reviews first!