Any comments about Canon EF 100-300 f/4.5-5.6 USM?

[andre_santos]

Optical quality?
Low coust?
Advantages?

Thanks.

[DarkPenguin]

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct...oduct/76/cat/11

An alternative that is pretty well liked in that range is the sigma 70-300 APO

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct...duct/230/cat/31

[DavidJ]

If my experience of the Canon 100-300 is typical I would say avoid. It is soft and has poor contrast. It was not usable on the 10D and I wouldn't even bother trying it on my 5D. It was only ever useful on my film body for 4X6, for magnifications above that  the image fell apart. It is now collecting dust somewhere I don't have the nerve to sell it.

David

[andre_santos]

Is this Sigma better than Canon?
I know some Sigma lenses, i have 24-70 DX ...
The big problem of Sigma lenses is the durability .... then I´m not a photojournalist!

Optical quality?
Low coust?
Advantages?

Thanks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=99154\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[thechrisproject]

The first lens I owned was a Promaster 28-80 that was a real piece of poo.  The second lens I got was the 100-300.  The first copy I got would give an Err99 error whenever I focused in a certain way.  I took it back.  Eventually I found another copy that didn't give the error and I bought it cheap.

Compared to the Promaster, it had pristine optics.  It focused quick and was quiet.  It suffers from zoom creep pretty bad if you walk around with it.  Since I bought it, I've developed a better eye for what differentiates a good and bad lens and I'm not quite as impressed with it.  More importantly, I realized that I don't really want a zoom like that.

If it you can get it cheap and it isn't a mission-critical lens, it can be fun to play around with.

[avfoto]

I would say:
-too slow, no contrasty, weak consruction ...

I don´t recomend it.

Jaime
www.avfotografia.es