100-300 l series , anybody knows about

[luis_colon]

<p>it looks skinny for l series</p>

[yakim_peled1]

<p>http://www.photographyreview.com/mfr/canon/35mm-zoom/PRD_83409_3128crx.aspx</p>

<p>http://www.lensplay.com/lenses/lens_data.php?lensID=168</p>

<p>HTH.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>Not worth buying unless really really cheap. It's optically a notch better than the typical consumer 75-300 zoom but AF is among the worse ever made. Utter crap. The 70-200 4L USM with 1.4x is a lot better in every way.</p>

[jcolwell]

<p>The EF 100-300/5.6L is a wonderful lens. Sure, its AF is slow, but it works fine. I sold mine because I usually shoot zooms handheld, and IS is a great advantage for this. On a tripod, the 100-300L is sharper in the centre and corners at 300mm than both the 70-200/4L IS and 70-200/2.8L IS with EF 1.4x Extender. On a tripod, the 100-300L is virtually the same in the center as the 300/4L IS, and slightly softer in the corners; at f/8, they're virtually identical. On a tripod, my 100-300L was significantly better that my 70-300/4-5.6 IS at all settings. Handheld, the IS zooms take the cake almost every time, and so I sold my 100-300L. I also sold my 70-300/4-5.6 IS. The EF 100-300/5.6L is an excellent performer on a tripod and handheld in good light with high shutter speeds.</p>

[rsriram]

<p>I had one for a while and sold it. Sure it's sharp, but the AF is noisy and slow, there's no IS, the aperture is f/5.6 and I didn't like the push-pull zoom. I would buy it if it were very cheap.</p>

[User_1172872]

<p>Not only is the autofocus noisy and slow, manual focus is gritty and imprecise. You haven't told us what camera you want to use it with. If you don't need "full frame" the Canon 50-250 EF-S received a very good review from photozone, and it is widely available for US $ 250.</p>