70-300mm / 4-5.6 IS
70-300mm / 4-5.6 IS L
70-300mm / 4-5.6 IS DO (the compact physical design)
Can anyone comment on any compelling reasons to choose one over the others?
Obviously the L version is almost 3x the price of the regular. Are the pictures much better?
The DO version is nice & small (a great advantage when walking the city) but doesn't cost much less than the L.
I'm open to finding used gear.
Mainly I'll be using it either for landscapes where I'll stop down to f11 more or less.
AND, more frequently, I'll be using it for city scenes with tight 'graphic' compositions ala Jay Maisel (who I understand uses the Nikon versions 70-300mm & 28-300mm VR, 4.5-5.6 & 3.5-5.6 respectively).
I'd be much wider open & mostly hand held (e.g. f4 or 5.6) in this scenario.
I love great quality (5D2) and this would be my first zoom. I only have primes.