Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM 'L' lens review with samples (Full-frame and APS-C)

I have this lens. It is a solid piece, but the good thing about it is that it is actually quite portable, a bit chubby yes, but just as short, or shorter, than the cheaper options (which are lighter though). It is shorter than the 70-200 f/4 (but heavier) and much, much more compact than the 70-200 f/2.8. Compared to the Tamron SP 70-300 VC USD (which is agerat lens too) it is far sharper over the whole image, clear vivid colors, less vignetting etc. If you need reach, but still want to keep things reasonably portable, it is great.

[@ehabko5818]

would you choose this lense or ef 70-200 f4 is usm 1 gen ??

[@awesomeheavendac]

@@ehabko5818if you want better image quality, 70-300 I also assume you’re talking about the 70-200 f/4 is usm as gen 1 70-200 for constant aperture and costs less money And it all comes down to your needs, will you need the additional 300mm or are you fine with just 200mm? Is 5.6 too dark for you? Sorry I’m late

[@terpy-j7x]

I just wanted to say I really appreciate your videos. They are thorough, professional and your image samples on both FF and APS-C sensors really help people make an informed decision about a lens purchase. Can't thank you enough!

[@Photoandcargeek]

You should re-review this lens, i ended up keeping it when switching from 5D to R5 because it is a really good alternative to the RF 100-400 5.6-8 (which is crazy expensive for it's aperture), and the very heavy and even more insanely priced RF 100-500 L. I also think it is a good alternative to the RF70-200 f4 and although it can't compete with the RF 70-200 f2.8L, the extra range is nice to have and a 70-300+85 or a 135 or a 200 fixed focus gives you a potentially better combo than a 70-200 2.8 with the downside of having to change lens but, if you are in a dark environment you might change lens anyway. A great lens at a very affordable price nowadays.

[@anirbanbhattacharjee3474]

Thanks for the review Chris. Helped me in my buying decision. I bought this over the normal 70-300 mm nano USM Mark 2 and boy am I delighted. It is worth every penny spent over the non-L version. I took some pictures of some birds under an overcast sky with very less light and still the outcome was amazing. The feathers of the birds came out super sharp. Now I am waiting for a sunny day to see the results. I feel if one can afford, this should be the lens of choice hands down. It's a true L quality Canon lens despite the variable aperture.

[@mralexlex]

Thank you Christopher for great review. It's a great lens, I had an opportunity to work with this lens on my full frame camera and image quality is simply outstanding, af super precise and IS is out of this world. I had EF 70-200 f4 IS for couple of years and I have to say that EF 70-300L lens surpass it in almost all categories.

[@boji4apa852]

This is the sharpest lens corner to corner, at any zoom range ive ever used! I absolutely love it!

[@richardsilva-spokane3436]

Christopher you are my go-to person for reviews. I have a Canon70D so I appreciate your APS-C comparisons 👍👍👍👍

[@alexkx3]

Got a used version for £450, so got the best at a more reasonable price.

[@melvinjohnson7033]

I always like hearing when Chris refers to price that "... this thing had better be good" lol.

[@Axonteer]

I bought one of this used, i guess the main use will be .... larger animals or birds (not small ones unless i can get close), planes at airshows and such things. My general thought behind getting it was that i want a telephoto lense with good image quality that is portable and has IS as i will be mostly shooting handheld. I just dont see myself shooting a 600mm image steady even with IS (handheld). I only had one walk with it so far on my 77D but it felt like even i as an amature could get stuff done. And its a perfect companion for my 18-85. Altho the 55-250mm is also a fine piece of kit. -> keep in mind i got it used for about 700$ in very good condition so... i might be a bit bias'd on price terms

[@The_CGA]

This is far and away the best corner sharpness I’ve seen from a less than fully modern zoom lens. Shame it’s a bit slow but I might be keen to adapt this onto my Fuji

[@danielcabrera5547]

Would love a revisit of this lens on canon new mirrorless systems!

[@Arlantix]

Good analysis and review. This is an excellent lens, among Canon’s finest, with superb image quality, colours, sharpness, dynamic range and very useful IS. I am happy to use it, it gives excellent results.

[@hywel3143]

Thanks for your useful and considered review, Christopher, which reflects the performance of my copy of this lens exactly. I've recently purchased it secondhand. I based my purchase decision based on your review and several other very positive reviews, and use it mainly on a 6D. I also use it on a 100D for occasional bird photo projects to get that effective 480mm reach. It's so sharp at widest apertures and this offsets the fact that it is no faster than the standard Canon 70-300 lenses, which need stopping down for best results. Although it is slightly weighty, the stubby design means that the weight is balanced near the camera body. The relative shortness and robustness of the lens also makes it eminently packable for travel. The rendering is really natural, and it complements the fantastic sensor in the 6D really well. This is a great lens!

[@John_N_from_NC]

Another great review Chris! I almost bought the Refurbished 70-300L but Canon sold out of them before I had enough money to buy it, so I bought the Tamron instead. So far so good on my 6D on my initial testing. I have a 30 day window if I want to keep it or not from B&H. Thanks for all you're doing, it's really appreciated!............

[@cheapsmoke4096]

im looking at buying this lense for wildlife stuff, i dont really want to go the 400mm because of the massive size and weight, so this lense would suit as a good all rounder?

[@leviyaakubov1875]

Canon 70-300mm f / 4-5.6 IS USM L 'lens from Canon's prestigious series. My expectations were higher than her. Compared to Canon 55-250. It's a shame not to replace it with a new generation with a fixed F4. And better quality and sharp optics.

[@MaximMuir]

I hope you get to borrow the new 70-300mm F4.0-5.6 IS II (non-L) to see how it does stack up for 1/3 the price.

[@chelepalma]

Your reviews are the best in the world man

[@swetstaaled3549]

I have this lens and its so sweet. IQ is great , on my EOS 90D reach is formidable plus its a great carry. I have several favorite lenses and with all the wonderful photo's it got me this is sure one of them !

[@randomrazr]

70-300L or the 70-200mm f4 II L IS?

[@christopherfrost]

It's up to you! They're both pretty fantastic

[@b.simmons5234]

70-200 2.8L That's 2 stops loss. If you need a farther zoom just get an extender 1.4. and you'll probably get tired of carrying a big bulky lens and will ridiculous using it daily unless taking sports or wildlife. Just watch Art Wolfe Travel to the Edge and his get go lens is the 70-200 2.8.

[@cypherdk85]

The 70-200 f4 is amazing. But try looking into the Tamron 70-300mm VR, the VR on it is simply amazing. Even I with my shaky hands can get sharp images down to 1/20th shutter speed with it. It isn't perfect, but very very good. But the 70-200 f4 is the one I'd pick for sharpness.

[@cooper9917]

70-200mm f4 ii L IS hands down. let's in a lot of light, but weighs very little. it's an excellent choice for travel and carrying all day. it won't weigh you down, and the image quality is FAR better.

[@wilkfenris]

For me as a wildlife shooter, very interesting to see would be a super zoom battle. Currently, we have four 150-600mm lenses. Two Sigma's: Sigma C 150-600 mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM and more expensive Sigma S 150-600 mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM. We also have two Tamron's: Tamron SP 150-600 mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD and still fresh Tamron SP 150-600 mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2. It would be a very interesting duel of giants :) There are not too many well-made comparisons of all four models.

[@suryaprakash5687]

Please do review on Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 VC USD G2 lens

[@donmcquillan7764]

Great review. Very impressed by it's sharpness.

[@chrisroberton1]

Hi Chris, would you say this lens has better rendering/sharpness than the Sigma 100-400 DN for landscapes?

[@johnmarais7772]

Excellent review thanks Christopher. Please can you give me your view. My wife and I are in the middle of a 3 year caravan tour of Southern Africa, spending most of our time in game parks on self-drive safaris, currently interrupted by Covid-19. We own 2 x Canon 7D MkIIs, on mine I have a 150-600mm Sigma Contemporary (photographing mainly birds and distant animals) and are looking for a lens for my wife. She will use it for a combination of closer birds, animals and videoing. We are down to a choice between the Canon 70-300mm reviewed in this article (our first choice) and the more modern Canon 70-200mm F4 L IS II. We primarily photograph from in the car using beanbags and door mounts and mostly on reasonable weather days. My only concern is the 5.6 of the 300 (at the further end of the range) vs the 4.0 of the 200 plus the additional 250gms weight on the 300, particularly when videoing. Your thoughts would be appreciated, many thanks. Cheers John

[@dunnymonster]

The title confused me when I read tested on both full frame and APSC. I wondered how you managed to mount it to an APSC body until watched your tests mounting it to the mirrorless body via an adapter 😃

[@christopherfrost]

It will mount on an APS-C DSLR, too, like all full-frame DSLR lenses :-)

[@dunnymonster]

Christopher Frost Photography I was always under the impression Canon's full frame and APSC lenses were not interchangeable or is it just APSC lenses that won't mount on full frame bodies?

[@christopherfrost]

Full-frame lenses will work on APS-C. Non-Canon APS-C lenses will fit onto full-frame bodies, but will show vignetting. Canon's APS-C lenses (EF-S lenses) are deliberately designed not to fit on full-frame camera bodies at all. And mirrorless lenses won't work on digital SLR cameras at all (but DSLR lenses will work on mirrorless if you have an adaptor)

[@riciy]

right, it's the latter..

[@dunnymonster]

Christopher Frost Photography Thanks for explaining Chris :-D

[@Explorer87]

Hello there Christopher. Im wondering why on dxomark this glass have only 8-9p-mpx on aps-c cameras if it is so sharp. Im for this glass for my 77D.

[@vinvanid]

Chris, hope you can retest this lens for EOS R7, that will be great for R7 users to find whether this lens is perfect for their travel telephoto options.. Thanks in advance 🙏😁

[@teej626]

Just got this lens to go with my R7. I already have the RF 100-500L, which is fantastic, however I wanted something a little smaller, and I've always loved the 70-300 focal range. This lens is just fantastic on the R7. Razor sharp, and quick AF. It does take a little getting used to with the zoom ring at the end of the lens, but it's almost as sharp as my 100-500L. Great lens.

[@Losnariu12]

What about the EF 28-300mm?

[@HectorSuzy]

Excellent review as usual mate!

[@spunkysandoval]

Have you played with any of the in body 5 axis stabilized cameras? Does lens stabilization even matter anymore with the in body stuff?

[@espro436]

In my opinion Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC is better and cheaper option. Use this lens on my Canon 6D for some wedding shoots on 200-300mm mostly.

[@JoeJacksonJr]

I have it also, have to stop down to f/8 to get any decently sharp images. However it is the better buy for a $500 USD Lens. Do keep in mind the updated Canon 70-300 mk II will be released next week.. I would hold out and see how it performs before making any purchasing decisions..

[@espro436]

Joe's Photo & Video Channel maybe you got some bad exemplar. Mine is pretty sharp even at f4. Gets job done, at least for me :).

[@JoeJacksonJr]

espro Its just becuase I am using it on the 70D and 80D. It just does not hold up as well on APS-C.. On Full Frame its still very good..

[@morvegil]

Its a great lens. I call it the "Travel Telephoto". You can stand it up in any camera bag.

[@trisonat7235]

dam waiting for 100-400mm Is usm mark II review. hope you will care my request coming reviews.

[@trisonat7235]

now i bought this lens. awaited for review all of them busy. So m bought with my decision. Now m happy with better output.

[@trisonat7235]

Mikhail Campbell I have 500px try to search my profile 500px.com/waterboy

[@tomasschon6377]

Please advise experienced. I have a Tamron 70-300 F4-5.6 VC USD. Is it worth buying this lens? When comparing parameters, there is 90% agreement :) So that I don't just buy an "L" feeling. Thank you for your experience and answer.

[@victoaubry]

Hi, is it better than the 70-200mm F4 L IS USM ?

[@haythamfpv]

Which is better, this one or the DO version?

[@AnkurTripathi]

I am so tempted to buy this 😍😍😍😍

[@stanislavsergiyenko819]

Hello Christopher, i like to shoot landscapes on long-focus objects. Which is sharper than the lens: EF 70-200mm f / 4L IS USM or Canon EF 70-300mm f / 4-5.6L IS USM? And which one gives a more contrasting picture?

[@christopherfrost]

They're both about as good as each other! I would go for the 70-300

[@daithilacha1]

Question for you Christopher. You say that the APC sensor places a greater test on the Lens sharpness than it does on FF format. I was under the impression that because the APC sensor uses the central portion of this lens, normally the sweet spot anyways, that it generally performs better than it would on an FF camera, espc in the corners. Previous comparisons I have seen show these type of lenses exhibiting noticeably better corners on the smaller senor cameras like my 7d.

[@cypherdk85]

I know this is an old video, but you should check the Tamron 70-300mm VR lens, I've never seen VR as good as on that lens, it is even better than the VR/IS in the Nikon and Canon pro zoom lenses.

[@christopherfrost]

I've tested that lens already

[@cypherdk85]

And here I thought I had watched almost all your videos by now :P Must have missed that one completely :P

[@prazfighta]

how do you like the m3? I'm considering getting one.

[@christopherfrost]

For the price you pay, I actually think it's pretty good although it's certainly not without its foibles hehe

[@mactopia1]

Get the M5 for DPAF! Happy owner here. Rumours are, Canon won't have another crop mirrorless that trumps the M5 and M6 before releasing its full-frame mirrorless answer to Sony (possibly waiting for Nikon to make its move first) in 2018.

[@DRIVECLUBistimelessPS4]

This or 100-400 for Canon 90d? i already have the 18-135 kit lens, so looking for some telephoto, but i want to keep it portable and flexible. 100-400 looks amazing, but i was always looking at this 70-300 as well.. i'd love travel+wildlife

[@christopherfrost]

It's up to you, really - for wildlife I'd personally go for the 100-400

[@DRIVECLUBistimelessPS4]

@@christopherfrost Thank you!

[@rickysingh616]

How's it compare with the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM Lens?

[@groundhoppingwlkp3622]

It's completely different type of lens. 70-200 2.8 you use to have good background separation, often in indoors or other darker venues (artificial lights etc.) 70-300 4-5.6 is a lens for good overcast weather and won't give such big backround separation on 300mm 5.6 like 200mm on 2.8. But it's far more portable piece of kit.

[@thecheshirewolf100]

I have a 750d body, I have a canon 70-300mm II usm lens, it works well for me, would it be worth swapping for this L- lens, I was looking at the 70-200mm L lens as well but I would lose how far I could zoom I assume, what's your advice please

[@christopherfrost]

Take a look at my reviews of those lenses, and you'll see the differences, and which one is right for you :-)

[@aruna5967]

thanks for the great vedio. is this sharper as same as Canon 70-200 L f4 is ?

[@christopherfrost]

They're very similar I think

[@derreth]

Hello Chris Do you know if this lens can be used with canon 1.6 or 2 x converter on either my full frame 5D mk III or my cropped 8OD

[@alexg4758]

The lens is not compatible with the canon extenders unfortunately 😢

[@Ravencroft81]

How does it stack up against the Canon EF 28-300mm L ?

[@christopherfrost]

Never tried that one I'm afraid

[@gilsonkoi1343]

Can you shot good wedding photos on this lens?

[@danielmoore6977]

Yes

[@danieljones8706]

I was wondering about this lens. Its expensive, but it could be nice for outdoor sports during the day, especially if the ball is prone to flying your way. That's when durability counts. lol

[@mitchmoeller4705]

Hi so I am looking to buy some lenses for my new 80d I am using it for casual shooting and ravel. I also want to do a little beginner wildlife I was thinking like a nice wide zoom lens like the 17-85 bug according to you that lens is horrible so something like that and maybe a long zoom inalready have 50 1.8 thanks also what is better 70-200 f4 no is or 70-300 is. Thanks

[@christopherfrost]

The Tamron 70-300 VC USD could be a good lens for you. Take a look at my reviews.

[@mitchmoeller4705]

Christopher Frost Photography can u also recommend me a reasonably price lens that goes wide to around 50 or 70 thanks

[@nigelbowen206]

Hi there, I would like to complement you on your reviews I found them so helpful. I'm looking for advice on getting into photography, always have a small compact in my rucksack. There is so much advice out there I'm baffled and I'm unsure which way to go, I have looked at the Cannon 7d II which has great reviews even though its an old camera. Wildlife photography would be my main interest, therefore the Canon 70 - 300 looks impressive. I have a budget of around £1000 therefore I will have to purchase second hand equipment. If you have the time and could suggest a combination I would be so grateful. Nigel

[@DrOksalev]

Are you planning on testing the new Canon EF 70-300 f/4.0-5.6 IS USM II ?

[@christopherfrost]

Yup!

[@DrOksalev]

Will wait for it impatiently

[@scorpionx211]

Hi Chris, I thought about buying this lens but instead I bought the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 OS.. which one is better in your opinion?

[@longtranbao4372]

The 120-300 is in a different league. It is an overpowered lens. You made the right choice

[@scorpionx211]

I assume you are correct but the 120-300 is sooo heavyy makes me wonder if there is anything better I can have instead

[@mohan16862]

Hi. Could you please test tamron 150 - 600 g2 and compare to its predecessor? Many thanks.

[@jameslarsen9814]

Just to let you know, Dustin Abbott has a few in-depth videos about it, and compares it to the V1. Figured I'd let you know! :)

[@mohan16862]

James Larsen yup i saw that. The dxomark test the new g2 lens and looks like the it s less sharper then old version. I was about to buy a new one but the results from dxomark seems not convincing.

[@jameslarsen9814]

You should check out Kristopher Rowe's pictures he's taken with the G2. He is a professional Wildlife photographer and he's gotten some great shots. Judging from more then just DXO, it does look sharper then the G1 to be 100% honest when you look at the sample images (not just MFT charts).

[@mohan16862]

James Larsen well that s the confusion. He also has some great images from first version which are equally good as g2. Im using tamron first version for more than 2 yrs which s fantastic lens.. in order to move to g2 I need clear conclusion.

[@jameslarsen9814]

Ah, ok.

[@blazweindorfer]

Hey Chris, i realy like your reviews and after seeing this one and searching through youtube I'm realy interested in a review of the nev Canon 70-300 f4 - f5.6 IS II nanoUSM and how it compares to this lens, since it is much cheaper and wich one is worth buying?

[@christopherfrost]

I will be checking it out when I can get hold of one. I hear it's good

[@opwave79]

I'm very interested in this lens. I've seen maybe two or three for sale used in good working condition. I just might buy it.

[@DelsquarePhotovideo]

Does this come with a tripod collar?

[@groundhoppingwlkp3622]

Nope

[@DelsquarePhotovideo]

@@groundhoppingwlkp3622 I figured 10 months ago when I bought it.

[@mhsvz6735]

Worth every penny!

[@ivanrebic8520]

Hy Christopher, would it be possible for you to do a 70-300 lens battle (like you did with 50mm and 24-105mm lenses)? I'm looking to buy a 70-300 lens (but lower price one, not this monster), I've seen many Sigma vs Tamron 70-300 macro comparisons but nobody compares them to the Tamron 70-300 VR or old Canon lenses, I would really like to know it is worth the investment (as far as IQ goes, not the OS). It is also kinda sad that there are no cheap 70-200 lenses :(

[@christopherfrost]

I am thinking of doing that, yes, after I've covered a couple more lenses

[@FranciscoGuevarra]

This or the 80-200 f2.8? Will use on Sony A7 with adapter MF.

[@christopherfrost]

I haven't tested any 80-200mm lenses (and I'm not sure which one you're thinking of, anyway). Merry Christmas and a happy new year!

[@FranciscoGuevarra]

Christopher Frost Photography it's the old canon L 80-200mm :) its very cheap now second hand in good condition

[@mhsvz6735]

Thanks for another excellent review.

[@neotrium9330]

This has nothing to do with this video, by the way I enjoy your content very much, but I was wondering if you will be making a review of the new samyang 85mm 1.2 that just came out?

[@christopherfrost]

Hopefully one day!

[@robbyatmaja6896]

Thanks for the information, for my purpose I'll go to 300mm f4L iS USM instead. Very good review as always.

[@PeteC62]

Robby Atmaja You seem to have promoted Chris to the level of his Savior :)

[@robbyatmaja6896]

***** really??? 😮 Thank you for correcting me than 🙏

[@JoeJacksonJr]

Nice review, I been waiting for you to review that lens for a while now also. hehe.. Think I will just hold out for the 100-400mm mk II, I do not shoot much that tele anyway. How old is your Rabbit getting to be, its been in a few of your videos for some years now... Cheers, Joe :-)

[@ronaldstilting]

Hello Joe, if "you don't shoot that much tele anyway" I really recommend this 70-300L. It is really compact and you will easily take it every time, unlike the 100-400, with a great quality. I don't need anything else apart from my standardzoom when travelling.

[@a.vand.5634]

Dear Chris, if you compare this lens with the L serie lens which one do you prefere? And why? Thnx for your answer. Greetings from The Netherlands. André

[@christopherfrost]

This is an 'L' lens

[@GinoFoto]

I have this lens, is very sharp indeed comparable to 70-200 F4 (non-IS). My copy have a slightly movable focus ring.

[@mvp_kryptonite]

My copy also has some lateral play in the focus ring. Sad it didn’t have the usual tripod collar. Lovely lens however

[@markrigg6623]

Same here. And its wonderfully sharp.

[@fahadbashraheel1187]

As always great review and fantastic images. Can you please review the canon 100-400mm L mark 2? And also can you do a tutorial on photo editing. I really love your images it's always perfect no matter what lens you use. Thanks

[@JoaquimGonsalves]

Awesome review! any third party alternatives?

[@christopherfrost]

Loads - the main competition would be the Tamron 70-300 VC USD

[@EckyBoy007]

Nice review - good job :)

[@MrDamoHutchinson]

Fantastic lens I love mine.

[@jbinmd]

Is it me, or is this lens contrastier than other lenses?

[@christopherfrost]

It has a load of contrast, that's for sure

[@shaunbay2]

So this, or the tamron 70-300?

[@christopherfrost]

Depends more on how much you want to spend than anything else

[@daithilacha1]

Hi Christopher, a great review there. I used to own a 70-300L and used it on my 7D with superb results in almost every situation except for poor light. Its also quite afforadale second hand and be easily had from £750 pounds upwards for a nice example. And they hold their value really well.

[@doros9.2]

Hello Christopher and thank you for another nice review. Do you believe the image quality of this lens could compare to the EF 100-400mm Mark II? Or would you compare it to the Mark I of the 100-400? Thank you

[@christopherfrost]

I'd compare it to the newer mark ii 100-400

[@doros9.2]

I got the 100-400mm Mark 1 for a great price but the only thing I love about it are the 400mm. Image quality isn't really what I expected, although not bad, but what is most important is the almost lacking image stabilisation. Thinking of changing to the 70-300mm L.

[@markrigg6623]

Its as sharp as the 100 -400 mk ii, possibly a bit sharper.

[@patrickbeaton6697]

appreciate the vid

[@sergejkap.8045]

Sorry but at 300 mm it is not so sharp using apc sensor. I use f8 i have many photo experiences and stable hand but...

[@mythos14]

which glas is the equivalent to this lens in the Nikon world? if there is..?

[@b.simmons5234]

Nothing is equivalent to Canon glass in Nikon world. Canon L series makes the best glass, I believe they are made by Zeiss.

[@girlperson1]

Thank you!

[@chacataplan]

God lent, buying the last month past year and yes!!! Gog true image.

[@yoyodude7624]

Cheapest lrns for canon m50 best lens under 200 dollars with IS and should be light weight and some amount of zoom should be there like 3x or 5x ok

[@christopherfrost]

Are you asking my advice? Check out the Canon EF-M 55-200mm

[@lunahringwangshol6933]

Price?

[@christopherfrost]

Google

[@hzubovi1]

Could you please review a Canon 28-300 and tamron 28-300

[@Splainte]

"Crême de la crême" haha, didn't know this was used by non-french people ^^

[@jonaruthardt363]

In Germany its used too.

[@stars7931]

Someone else have a slightly lose Focus Ring on this Lens?

[@HoangMinhVuong]

u forgot the test against bright light

[@christopherfrost]

Oh yeah! Ooops. It doesn't perform all that well against bright lights, but the flaring isn't too bad.

[@KaiHinLkh]

Why anyone would get a 70-300 for £1,000 is beyond me. The image quality is only slightly better than the Tamron but it is 4 times the price. The build quality is better of course, but i can break 3 Tamrons before having to spend the same amount of money, and I am yet to break one after using it for 5 years now.

[@JoeJacksonJr]

Weather sealing.. Well thats the only reason I would, but since I do not play in the rain and sure as heck not traveling to the north pole. I got the Tamron also.. LOL

I agree that the Tamron is great, I had one and was very happy with it, but the Canon L, which I have now, is noticeably better in terms of color, contrast, sharpness, chromatic abberation, vignetting etc. Not by an enormous amount, but clearly visible even without pixel peeping.

[@JoeJacksonJr]

Honestly everyone for the money, I would go with the Canon 100-400mm mark II. Its optics is much updated. Matter of fact that lens is 2nd on my list to get next year.. I would get sooner, but Wife would blow her top.. LOL

[@b.simmons5234]

Better overall when it comes to photography. When everyone is taking photos with their cheap shit lenses and pull your L series white lens they know you're stylin and makes you stand out from the rest.

[@pablom12345687]

i have the 100-300 ef canon and its really good!

[@bumpedhishead636]

Canon is capable of building a good, moderately priced lens, the EFS 55-250 IS STM proves that, but Canon simply refuses to do it for all their lenses. They give the consumers crap for a low cost and they charge outrageous prices for the L lenses. Nothing in between! Where are all the lenses with excellent glass but without all the pro features and build for $300-$500?? In that price range all we get are a few lenses that aren't really very useful. In every other industry the availability of low-cost, high-precision computer controlled industrial machines has dramatically reduced the cost/quality ratio of goods. But not in SLR lenses. Why??

[@z4ng3tsu1ch1g0]

The RF 16mm 2.8 and 35mm is 1.8 are very good for their price. $300 and $500 respectively. Not as sharp as pro L lenses with cheap builds but theyre close enough. No manufacturer including third party are making pro optics in that price range. That is why you buy older glass in the used market for cheaper. Samyang/rokinon and yongnuo are the closest ones but their manufacturing have terrible QC and they have shit warranties. Their more inexpensive, higher quality glass are all usually full manual lenses as well, no AF. There is always a trade off in buying gear, whether it is quality, build, or price

[@rodrigojds]

at minute 2:00 I think you meant to say effectively and not efficiently :)

[@AnkurTripathi]

U are the boss ✌🏻️

[@garybrown5769]

It’s this just the old DO re housed ? 🧐

[@nbroadsman]

No, this does not use the Diffractive Optics and has higher image quality throughout the zoom range and at every aperture than the DO lens. It is also on the Canon list of recommended lenses with enough resolving power for my 50 megapixel 5DsR and is a master class in build quality and a joy to use. A bargain lens now at secondhand prices.

[@DomeBME]

Could you please test Nikon's len (dx). :)

[@christopherfrost]

Nope. I'd like to but I definitely don't have enough time

[@MrQuirke9]

Some day I hope to afford this :/ :P

[@JoshuaMcTackett]

I really don't understand the point of a 70-300 4-5.6 in this day and age, especially as an L lens. 100-400 or 3rd party 150-600 cover the long end better, and 70-200 f2.8 much better serve the short end

[@sahilbrar7330]

well try it to find out i guess.. if you havent

[@FioraDeSalvateur]

3rd I guess :) Nice video Chris :D

[@aliefabdurrahman3302]

110 CM is 1,1 Meters.

[@zikuanchen5767]

Wow

[@timurselcuk1556]

Trabzonspor renklerine olan gorunum super trabzonspor gibi

[@jsrcajfysy9090]

That's a vere nice😶

[@victorshikhman]

next up, Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM. How much do kidneys go for these days?