EF tele zoom

[benjamin_ng]

has anyone compared EF100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM with EF90-300mm f/4.5-

5.6 USM?

[ron c sunshine coast,qld,a]

Yes but not directly.

<BR>I found the 100-300 to be a very good allround telezoom,allmost as sharp at 300mm as it was at 100mm(i've heard varying reports on this from others).Contrast was excellent,build quality very nice and focus speed was very fast.

<P>The 90-300 i didn't like at all!

<BR>I only have one reasonable pic to show for the time i had this lens.Contrast was very strong but resolution was low'ish.It also had some colour fringing.It felt very plastic and focus was rather slow

<P>Also consider the EF 75-300.It too has it's faults (including very slow focus)but i did seem to get some reasonable pics with it<P>http://members.dodo.net.au/~l8r_ron/pages/114_1467.htm<BR>http://members.dodo.net.au/~l8r_ron/pages/75-300@135mmf4.5.htm<BR>http://members.dodo.net.au/~l8r_ron/pages/75-300@190mmf5.6.htm<BR>http://members.dodo.net.au/~l8r_ron/pages/75-300@205mmf8.htm<BR>http://members.dodo.net.au/~l8r_ron/pages/75-300@210mmf6.3.htm<BR>http://members.dodo.net.au/~l8r_ron/pages/75-300@300mmf5.6.htm<BR>http://members.dodo.net.au/~l8r_ron/pages/75-300@75mmf9.htm

<P>Personally the 75-300 is the bare minimum i would recommend

<BR>Also look into the sigma 70-300 APO macro super II.It has a good reputation,maybe slightly better than the canon 100-300