Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
next PZ Lens Test Report - Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM DO IS
#17
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1282142050' post='1872']

Yes, in width it is bigger. That is true. But not to the extent that that makes a real difference in just about any bag... length usually is a deciding factor though, bag or case wise.



Especially mounted on camera that 4.5 cm is a big difference.

Is that important enough for everyone? No, it is a niche lens.

[/quote]

That is describing the exact reasoning I went for the DO. I don't always want to travel with big lenses (100-400L). My smaller bags effectively limit on length not width. The regular 70-300 would be too long. The only other lenses that can go 250mm+ and are physically short are the superzooms, which generally are pretty bad by the time you get to the long end. The 55-250IS was close, but EF-S mount and no USM put me off (I was also playing with a 5D1 at the same time).



The price is still the hardest part to get over. Would I pay more for a smaller lens, yes, but it is in the ball park of 2.5x difference. Too much, I found a nice used one eventually saving a third off new.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
  


Messages In This Thread
next PZ Lens Test Report - Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM DO IS - by popo - 08-18-2010, 04:45 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)