Had this lens come with my kit. Like many people below are saying it was a great learning experience using it. The lack of image stabilization meant this lens lived it's life on a tripod, I have hand tremors so handholding this lens at its longer focal lengths was never an option outside of midday sun.
I recently bought it, and yeah I should’ve checked for the image stabilization..I have shaky hands too so the more I zoom in the more steady you have to be, but it’s great either way
There's a difference between honest reviews and making it sound terrible. The lens is is expensive for most people and it's pretty good imo. Not everyone has the money to buy 2000$ lenses.
@@saleshelp first one that comes to mind is the 55-250, newer, faster, and if you look at used prices, these 2 are around the same price. Only problem is that the 55250 is plastic, but atleast to me, everything else, from the image quality and just ease of use, the 55250 beats the shit out of this thing
@@saleshelp if you really only want the reach, then you can find the 100-300 usm at around the same price, better image quality, better motor, and definitely better build
I'm a high school student, and I have to use this for sports, I can tell you it makes you think and I learned a lot. Very challenging shoots. Especially at Basketball games.
This lens is hard to use for newbies because it has no stabilization. You have to understand the shutter speed requirements for the focal length being used. Anyone who shoots photos on this handheld at full zoom with a shutter speed below 1/250 is guaranteed to take a soft or blurred photo, especially on APS-C where this is equivalent to a 120-480mm. I have gotten some awesome shots from this lens, and you can actually get very nicely blown out backgrounds because the long focal lengths shrink the focus depth despite the narrow base aperture. I would recommend this lens to anyone who has a good understanding of how to use it. I love the stabilized 55-250mm EF-S lens too, and though it's more expensive, it's worth the extra money. I own both and like both. (It really does have some insane purple fringing though.)
Thanks for this. I just bought one, even though I have the 55-250 with stabilization already. I wanted the longer focal length for use with a tripod in wildlife photography, and I'm satisfied with the quality considering the cost.
This is the perfect beginner telephoto lense and was sold to me as such. Super cheap, but can still perform reasonably in the right settings. I caught a gorgeous elephant trunk tornado shot in this thing (on an ASP-C Rebel D500 nonetheless), and at 190mm it was good enough for a decent 20x30 high-res. I actually hadnt taken this thing out in over 2 years, but came in clutch when i needed it to. Im mostly a wide shot storm/landscape photographer, but occasionally need to break out a telephoto when i cant get any closer due to bad road network, bad planning, timing, etc. This thing gets the job done when i needed it. Given that my subject and shot change so rapidly, are naturally low contrast, and made up of wispy bits that autofocus hates, I typically use full auto, iso-priority, or some landscape oriented settings and adjust focus manually. This helps offset the lack of internal stabilization by adjusting shutter speed and aperture automatically and accounting for my hand movements and allows me to get decent hand balanced shots. Not perfect, especially if the light is poor like at sunset. Tornado chasing is already crazy intense enough and absolutely demands your constant attention on other things like forecasting, navigation, and unexpected road hazards. The luxury of enough time to consider manual camera settings almost never exists, so quick, easy, and cheap are exactly what im looking for in a lense i rarely use.
I'm currently using this lens with my Fujifilm X-T30 via an adapter (note this is APS-C). Can confirm the results are quite subpar, especially when zoomed all the way, as purple fringing is really noticeable. Sharpness is also mediocre; the chances of getting a blurry photo is higher than I'd want. Lastly I find this lens has poor contrast and saturation. Honestly unless you're truly broke (which I am), I'd def recommend spending $100-200 more on a better lens. This probably doesn't apply to most folks here, but for Fujifilm users, the XC 50-230mm is a FAR better telephoto than this one, and that's Fujifilm's cheap line! I will absolutely snatch one the moment it goes on sale. But for now I'll have to make do with this one.
got this lens as "free" as it came with my 1300D 3 years ago. Now i have to say, it's not the best lens and it's give HUGE chromatic aberrations at 200+mm however, it's fairly good under that, i found that the sweet spot is around 135mm. great lens to start with if you only need an occasional telephoto on bright days
I have an older version of this lens, if you point that lens upwards the lens dezooms automaticly because the focus ring is to loose, I think that's why in this one the focus ring is stiffer
I have used this lens with my Canon RP and it has worked without mayor issues. I had to higher the ISO because I didn't have a speedlight with me, but the images came out neat.
@@vbeniii94 I used a higher shutter speed (about 1/100) and shoot using the viewfinder to have more stability. It is not as fast when focusing (especially in comparison with RF glass), but once I nailed tje focus the pictures came out decent.
I don't know if anybody will find this useful, but I have been shooting with this lens for over 3 years now and here are my thoughts: You get what you pay for, the lens is cheap and sometimes quite useful. I was able to get some good photos of birds of prey or even some nice landscape photos and close-ups. However, as mentioned in the video, the lens is sharp when zoomed-out at 70 mm, but the image quality gets worse as you zoom-in. At 300 mm, it performs poorly. If you manage to get you subject in focus, you will still need to hold the camera pretty firmly, because even when it gets a bit cloudy, the loss of light is significant. For me, it happens quite a lot, that the lens misses focus at 300 mm often. Thus, the subject is sharp, but not where I wanted to focus. But, when it focuses right, I had also light issues. I use Canon 700D (APS-C) and even ISO of 800 will show up on the photo, when you open it on the PC, which will potentially degrade the image quality even more. I also used it using tripod and managed to get some nice landscape photos, even of sunset, but again, if the lens is zoomed all the way in, it will potentially miss the focus. Another issue is the colour output, which can be very bad and will show up, when the light conditions get worse. Even light mist in the distance will make it difficult for the camera to focus and will produce weird colours. Overall, if you are tight on the budget, you can certainly go for this lens and you can shoot nice photos and if you are just starting out, you will find the lens pretty useful for trying out different settings on your camera and learn shooting moving subjects, but I would not reccomend it if you have the option to go for a better lens. I would say, get Canon 50 mm f/1.8 at first, which is an excellent lens for its price, useful for landscape and portraits. You will find it much more entertaining than struggling to get nice wildlife photos using this lens.
Just bought this in October 2024 for £80 of EBay and in excellent condition, What can you buy for £80 for the zoom range at this price and there are sweet spots and super sharp images, Auto this, auto that is far to easy now days and that’s the joy of photograph as a camera is only as good as the person behind it 🥳🥳🥳
Using on Canon R5, it’s nice and light and have taken some moon shots in manual, just used for walking around on footpath if I need a bit more reach and carry a shorter lens in pocket, have not had issue with AF and works fine for me. My lens is not stiff at all compared to the lens you are reviewing and is quieter than yours. I also own the 55-250 lens and use on the R10. This is a great lens for £80 🥳🥳🥳
I just bought one for my M50 and R50. I use it with the speed booster and it gets down to F2.8. Going to go shoot birds in a couple days and see how it does. Great video!!!
Its a fantastic lens for the price but needs a lot of Microfocus adjustment, i had to adjust my lens at -20 at tele and wide end as the lens suffers from massive front focus issue but after tuning it the results are worth the money you spend.
I'm using the lens adapted with the Viltrox Speedbooster on my M50 which transforms it to a "53-213mm 2.8" and I got very pretty handheld wildlife-shots. Bought it at eBay for 65€ and I'm really impressed for that budget . Autofocus is okay for dove-shots at the beach at cloudy weather or reindeers at dawn at high shutter-speeds. So I'm fully satisfied. Even the build quality is not that bad as you you descibe, maybe you had bad luck with yours. For beginners or amateurs a good value in that combination.
I was looking for this kind of comment. Glad that you have it. I also have the same speedbooster and same camera. How's the lowlight performance? I need a long zoom by next week for a formal annual dinner (mostly speeches and giving awards for employees, nothing wild).
@@astigmatik Hm that's hard to tell,it nearly is a f2.8,so it depends on available roomlight... For a candlelight-dinner it won't be enough because of the not so good lowlight performance of the M50.
My M6 mark II with Viltrox adapter or speedbooster has no problems with this lens. I got a good used one for cheap to replace a Quantaray 70-300 that was noisy and had other issues.
I just bought this lens for 80 euros. I use it for wildlife fotography with a tripod. No problems so far. Except for the noise. It's pretty loud. But it's a cheap way to get some distance between you and your "target"...
Far too many whiners, here. These lens is on sale for an extremely low price, now. If you expect same results as with a 2000$ lens.... well, that says it all.
The lens is actually really good on full frame. But on apsc sensors, it's basically unusable at anything over 150mm. I mean it's so soft, you can't make out any detail.
Hi Chris, just one question. Why do you turn on corrections in camera? Wouldn't it be better to see how a lens performs without any corrections turned on in the camera? I know you are testing the Canon, lenses on Canon cameras which have lens corrections for Canon lenses, but it could be useful to see how the lens performs without corrections, especially for those maybe looking to get the lens to use on a non Canon camera which doesn't have corrections, where chromatic aberrations and dark corners would be more noticeable and probably not fixable on the camera like they would be on Canon cameras.
Yes Canon lenses don't fit other cameras natively (Unless you use some Cinema cameras which have a Canon EF Mount like Bkackmagic cameras or Panasonic Varicam etc..), what I meant was I meant adapting the Canon EF lenses (Not EF-S or EF-M) onto other cameras with an adaptor like a Metabones adaptor/speedbooster onto cameras like Sony, Panasonic etc...as many like to do that and those cameras don't have the Chromatic Aberrations and vignetting correction Canon cameras do. Plus those that still use older Canon cameras (I use a 600D still) those don't have the in camera corrections.
Dave's Nature Productions Agree. He is not testing the lens. He is testing the correction software performance.... I really what to see the real CA/dark corners performance of lenses.
Hi Dave's Nature. It's a fair question and one that I've often wondered if I got right. Ultimately, the reason I decided to test with corrections 'on' is that a huge number of people will be shooting like that anyway. But of course, I know there are advantages and disadvantages in presenting test pictures from either way
The review was good, but it does miss the point of a review. I'm a beginner photographer, and this is a really good lens for beginners it makes you work and gets the job done, and this review does make this lens look like a bad option. If you are a higher-level photographer this lens is not for you, but the price tag alone most of the time answers that question.
Using a Canon R6ii (EF adapted) with a 24 Mpx sensor and *in-camera* stabilization -- we suddenly have a very workable lightweight all-day walking-around tele-zoom. Okay, not the greatest autofocusing system, but I mostly manually focus anyway. Brand new they're going for $200 -- so hardly a major risk if I wind up unhappy.
I am getting this lens once again, and can't wait to test it with my a6300 with speed booster. Only thing that worries me a little now is that extremely long focus distance. But let see.
So if I want to use it for panoramic stitching in landscape photography it is a very good lense because all that matters in this condition is sharpness at 200 to 300 mm !! Thanks for the review
Mildly interesting story maybe; so my girlfriend bought a Canon T5 kit and this lens came with it. She never ended up using it and put it on storage after she bought a 50mm 1.8. She forgot she even had it. Fast forward and I upgrade from the SL2 to EOS RP and I buy the EOS-R to EF adapter so I can use my own 35mm EF lens. We ended up cleaning out the storage a couple weeks later and we find the EF 75-300 III and I'm like wtf, this is an EF lens. She said she didn't like it on her smaller sensor so I took it home to try it out. And yeah, it's sharp on a full frame. It works well. Not bad for a free find basically. I did give her my SL2 and sold her T5.
Hmm, interesting. I am looking at the EOS R possibly in the future, and need a longer lens for occasional wildlife. Not much money will be left and this lens is super cheap. Did you have any focusing issues and did it work really well overall?
@@timgodfrey5738 Tim Godfrey the lens is crazy good, even disregarding price. It's tack sharp. But it's only really sharp on a full frame. It also doesn't have IS so you will need to crank that shutter speed unfortunately. But this shouldn't be a problem with lots of light. At 300mm, it can be a little rough to get a sharp image due to the lack of IS but it is possible. Good luck buddy. I like the lens. I've taken some great pictures with it and haven't had any issue focusing with it. It focuses faster on the RF bodies than the APS-C bodies.
@@StatusQuo209 Thank you for the prompt reply! I appreciate the insight. The lack of IS is for sure disappointing, but the price is so affordable. Plus, part of the time I would be shooting at high shutter speeds anyway, and when I can't, the EOS R's greatly improved high ISO performance compared to my current camera (600D/3Ti), I should be able to make it work by giving me more room to play with to bump up the shutter speed. If it is sharp, then I at least have a viable worst case scenario solution :-). Thanks again!
For my first efs lens on my r10, this is a nice starter lens, I believe my r10 has digital stabilize so I've had some great photos at the max zoom but my next lens will be a 70-200 2.8 g2
Hi Christopher! I have this lens lens lying around at my place, belongs to my girlfriend, and I personally own a Sony a7iii. My question is, would it be a good idea if I get an adapter for this lens to use with my Sony? How do you think the autofocus would perform? Thanks! :) Keep up the good work 👍🏼
Hey Chris, did you ever do a review of the EF-M mount that you use for the M3? I've got a few friends that use the M3 but they've no idea that you can use the EF lenses and I would like to point them to a video to show how easy it is to use it.
I’m using the 75-300mm and 18-135mm lenses for shots of the moon where I need less light coming in. Just as your tests pointed out that when stopped down to f/8 through pretty much the entire zoom range, it is sharp although I must point out that I’m using a t5i. Hope I can grab a full frame body to run these lenses some time in the near future. Would love to see the difference myself. Overall for me, this lens has been a great starting point so far especially when it comes to composition and Astrophotography.
I picked up one of these (yet to be shipped) for $45US. I'm new to the game but I'm curious how this will fair with the viltrox speed booster. Any experience pairing the two? Will be used on a canon M50
Im a owner of canon m50m2 i'm looking for a good telephoto budget lens but unfortunately which ever lens i have seen i only got a negative review for you. Im seriously confused now 😪. I saw tamron70300mmLD, Canon EFM55200 and now Canon 75300mm USM . Im now confused to pick one
When using my older systems, like my 1d classic or my 10d focus is vastly improved but this lens cannot be used with modern day cross type phase, detect af in servo mode effectively On contrast, detect systems, it’s smoothly transitions between points very well as on the tech systems it kind of jumps between points completely completely missing them in the process
LOL hilarious review. Thank you for honest opinions and getting the piss out in the most driest ways lol I don't mind fringing, distortions, soft edges and all, but it only works for some style of videos and not everything so it should work for some projects but never for any product photography or interviews. Best for music videos, short films and the art side of things. By the way, which lens should I get that's wider, good zoom and fast, for Canon 60D? I don't mind the mentioned effects and I don't mind no image stabilization, as long as it's manual. Id like to use it for establishing and master shots mostly and some trippy close-ups, where the bokeh is crazy
I have this lens right now, I was looking into maybe getting the tamron sp70-300mm lens... would you think I would get any benefits from switching lens?
I dislike this lens so much, I'm glad it was offered as a kit lens at a bargain $450 with the Canon 1200d, it was such a pain shooting with it and it was heavily inconvenient, the only "accurate" photos I got out of it were sunset photos and that's about it.
If a lens this cheap is this sharp on full frame it'll be good for me to pick out details in architecture and create flat, almost 2D looking images. The hideous AF doesn't matter as I usually focus manually when doing these photos
Hey I have the "Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II" but I just got a new lends that is the "Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 SP Di VC USD XLD" I'm not a pro photographer but I'm having a hard time noticing the difference between the two besides that the tameron goes 50mm more in distance, I like to shoot wildlife and I was watching one of your other videos where you are reviewing the the canon 70-300 I believe and you suggested that tamron was sharper is you wanted to shoot things like wildlife. So I just want to know basically if it's worth me keeping this lends since I feel like the canon 55-250 is just as good, they seem to be both sharp I'm having a hard time telling the diffrance. If anyone can help me out I'd appreciate it. I dont want to spend money on somthing that I kinda already have and maybe put the tamron money into a nice canon macro 100mm instead. Thank you!
It would be interesting to pair this with Canon R6. R5 would probably be too much for it. I had this one on my 550d and i remember hating it. Everything from shaky shots to purple fringing and clunkiness. But i didn't expected such excellent results on ff. But again 20 mp is not alot and this would have been more then enough back when it was designed.
Every lens is like this on apsc. It’s called crop for this very reason. Your sensor only “sees” the inner part of the whole picture from the lens, makes it look more zoomed in
Would it be decent for video? I need a big zoom for some corporate events but in a tight budget. Would use it with a GH5S so lowlight isn’t really an issue
If you're standing about 5 meters away from her then yes! You might want a wider angle lens with a bright maximum aperture, like the Canon 50mm f/1.8 (if you have a Canon camera)
I wanna take pictures of trains and planes with good quality buy also good zoom. Shall I go with this lens or the image stabiliser 55-250mm also mentioned in the video?
2:20 Curious and excited but confused beginner here - can you please explain "full time manual focus"? You said you have to switch to manual focus, then you immediately talk about the "auto focus mode." Please help!
With some lenses, you should not try to turn the focus ring when the lens is set to autofocus mode. With other lenses, you can turn the focus ring at any time, which is known as 'full-time manual focus'
Your original review was more accurate. I have one of these lenses and they are not good on a full frame (5D mk i). I agree with the comments below that any in camera lens correction should be turned off for these tests.
Hi Chris, thanks for the response. Have no issues with your sharpness tests although I find this lens a little softer at 300mm f5.6 on my FF. My issue was should lens correction be on or off. Having read your reply to Dave's Nature below I can see the reasoning behind it. Sorry to have raised this issue but I rate your reviews very highly, they are the best I've come across on UA-cam.
@@andrewwilkin1923 There is a lot of sample variation in lenses, and many budget lenses are built to somewhat approximate standards. This is one of those.
@@christopherfrost The biggest problem with this lens on full frame, based on two samples I've used, is the AF error at the long end, which for me has exceeded the adjustment capability of the 6D's AF microadjust...so in practice I found it very hard to focus accurately at 300mm.
The 55-250mm Canon lens is, I would say, a rather good choice for wildlife photography. Though you lose those 50mm, it's image stabilization makes the longer end of the focal length more accessible. That's not to say that the 75-300mm is unusable at 300mm. I've used it on my Rebel t5i for nearly 3 years now. This lens is certainly on the inexpensive side, but if you have the money for a little more of a lens, I would highly recommend either the Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 SP Di VC USD XLD or the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 is II USM Lens. Both with image stabilization, and both with the great reach of 300mm that will be excellent for things like birds, which is usually what I like taking pictures of.
Had this lens come with my kit. Like many people below are saying it was a great learning experience using it. The lack of image stabilization meant this lens lived it's life on a tripod, I have hand tremors so handholding this lens at its longer focal lengths was never an option outside of midday sun.
I recently bought it, and yeah I should’ve checked for the image stabilization..I have shaky hands too so the more I zoom in the more steady you have to be, but it’s great either way
The no image stabilization doesnt bother me, because I use a tripod mostly. It works just fine for me!
There's a difference between honest reviews and making it sound terrible. The lens is is expensive for most people and it's pretty good imo. Not everyone has the money to buy 2000$ lenses.
This is exactly correct. It’s a very nice lens for someone who is trying to start like myself
well there are other lenses that are around the same price or only 20-30$ more expensive but are much better
do you actually have an example of a lens better for only $20 more? i was about to buy this....
@@saleshelp first one that comes to mind is the 55-250, newer, faster, and if you look at used prices, these 2 are around the same price. Only problem is that the 55250 is plastic, but atleast to me, everything else, from the image quality and just ease of use, the 55250 beats the shit out of this thing
@@saleshelp if you really only want the reach, then you can find the 100-300 usm at around the same price, better image quality, better motor, and definitely better build
I'm a high school student, and I have to use this for sports, I can tell you it makes you think and I learned a lot. Very challenging shoots. Especially at Basketball games.
hello! thinking about it. do you have photo of games? just trying to understand how photos will looks like
@@eastraisin It's an incredibly slow lens. Unless you like manual focusing, I wouldn't for my life recommend it.
This lens is hard to use for newbies because it has no stabilization. You have to understand the shutter speed requirements for the focal length being used. Anyone who shoots photos on this handheld at full zoom with a shutter speed below 1/250 is guaranteed to take a soft or blurred photo, especially on APS-C where this is equivalent to a 120-480mm. I have gotten some awesome shots from this lens, and you can actually get very nicely blown out backgrounds because the long focal lengths shrink the focus depth despite the narrow base aperture. I would recommend this lens to anyone who has a good understanding of how to use it. I love the stabilized 55-250mm EF-S lens too, and though it's more expensive, it's worth the extra money. I own both and like both. (It really does have some insane purple fringing though.)
Thanks for this. I just bought one, even though I have the 55-250 with stabilization already. I wanted the longer focal length for use with a tripod in wildlife photography, and I'm satisfied with the quality considering the cost.
This is the perfect beginner telephoto lense and was sold to me as such. Super cheap, but can still perform reasonably in the right settings. I caught a gorgeous elephant trunk tornado shot in this thing (on an ASP-C Rebel D500 nonetheless), and at 190mm it was good enough for a decent 20x30 high-res.
I actually hadnt taken this thing out in over 2 years, but came in clutch when i needed it to. Im mostly a wide shot storm/landscape photographer, but occasionally need to break out a telephoto when i cant get any closer due to bad road network, bad planning, timing, etc. This thing gets the job done when i needed it.
Given that my subject and shot change so rapidly, are naturally low contrast, and made up of wispy bits that autofocus hates, I typically use full auto, iso-priority, or some landscape oriented settings and adjust focus manually. This helps offset the lack of internal stabilization by adjusting shutter speed and aperture automatically and accounting for my hand movements and allows me to get decent hand balanced shots.
Not perfect, especially if the light is poor like at sunset. Tornado chasing is already crazy intense enough and absolutely demands your constant attention on other things like forecasting, navigation, and unexpected road hazards. The luxury of enough time to consider manual camera settings almost never exists, so quick, easy, and cheap are exactly what im looking for in a lense i rarely use.
This comment is exactly what I was looking for 😂looking into buying this lense because having a weaker zoom has destroyed like 2 of my chases
I'm currently using this lens with my Fujifilm X-T30 via an adapter (note this is APS-C). Can confirm the results are quite subpar, especially when zoomed all the way, as purple fringing is really noticeable. Sharpness is also mediocre; the chances of getting a blurry photo is higher than I'd want. Lastly I find this lens has poor contrast and saturation. Honestly unless you're truly broke (which I am), I'd def recommend spending $100-200 more on a better lens.
This probably doesn't apply to most folks here, but for Fujifilm users, the XC 50-230mm is a FAR better telephoto than this one, and that's Fujifilm's cheap line! I will absolutely snatch one the moment it goes on sale. But for now I'll have to make do with this one.
Replying to myself so my comment gets bumepd to the top (I think thats how it works)
got this lens as "free" as it came with my 1300D 3 years ago. Now i have to say, it's not the best lens and it's give HUGE chromatic aberrations at 200+mm however, it's fairly good under that, i found that the sweet spot is around 135mm. great lens to start with if you only need an occasional telephoto on bright days
Was considering getting this lens to explore wildlife photography. This review was helpful. Thx!
Nice honest review. I bought the 55-250 a couple of days after watching your review a number of months ago. Cheers.
i just started with this lens few years ago and i recommend it for beginners :D
I just bought a Canon 2000d and those lens because i’m a beginner and i was wondering if they are good for wildlife:)
@@Vlad-fk4co I’m getting the same exact thing do you think I should get it
Ehhh, I honestly think using this lens is like torturing yourself, but to each their own.
I have an older version of this lens, if you point that lens upwards the lens dezooms automaticly because the focus ring is to loose, I think that's why in this one the focus ring is stiffer
I want to sell
I have used this lens with my Canon RP and it has worked without mayor issues. I had to higher the ISO because I didn't have a speedlight with me, but the images came out neat.
Hi,
could you use it handheld with the RP? Did you have any issues with the adapter, was the focus fine?
Thanks!
@@vbeniii94 I used a higher shutter speed (about 1/100) and shoot using the viewfinder to have more stability. It is not as fast when focusing (especially in comparison with RF glass), but once I nailed tje focus the pictures came out decent.
@@daelgamas28 thanks for the quick reply, just got one 2 days ago. It works fine with my rp
Have a nice day!
I don't know if anybody will find this useful, but I have been shooting with this lens for over 3 years now and here are my thoughts: You get what you pay for, the lens is cheap and sometimes quite useful. I was able to get some good photos of birds of prey or even some nice landscape photos and close-ups. However, as mentioned in the video, the lens is sharp when zoomed-out at 70 mm, but the image quality gets worse as you zoom-in. At 300 mm, it performs poorly. If you manage to get you subject in focus, you will still need to hold the camera pretty firmly, because even when it gets a bit cloudy, the loss of light is significant. For me, it happens quite a lot, that the lens misses focus at 300 mm often. Thus, the subject is sharp, but not where I wanted to focus. But, when it focuses right, I had also light issues. I use Canon 700D (APS-C) and even ISO of 800 will show up on the photo, when you open it on the PC, which will potentially degrade the image quality even more. I also used it using tripod and managed to get some nice landscape photos, even of sunset, but again, if the lens is zoomed all the way in, it will potentially miss the focus. Another issue is the colour output, which can be very bad and will show up, when the light conditions get worse. Even light mist in the distance will make it difficult for the camera to focus and will produce weird colours. Overall, if you are tight on the budget, you can certainly go for this lens and you can shoot nice photos and if you are just starting out, you will find the lens pretty useful for trying out different settings on your camera and learn shooting moving subjects, but I would not reccomend it if you have the option to go for a better lens. I would say, get Canon 50 mm f/1.8 at first, which is an excellent lens for its price, useful for landscape and portraits. You will find it much more entertaining than struggling to get nice wildlife photos using this lens.
Just bought this in October 2024 for £80 of EBay and in excellent condition, What can you buy for £80 for the zoom range at this price and there are sweet spots and super sharp images, Auto this, auto that is far to easy now days and that’s the joy of photograph as a camera is only as good as the person behind it 🥳🥳🥳
What body are you using it on & how are you finding the IQ & AF in the real world?
Cheers
Using on Canon R5, it’s nice and light and have taken some moon shots in manual, just used for walking around on footpath if I need a bit more reach and carry a shorter lens in pocket, have not had issue with AF and works fine for me. My lens is not stiff at all compared to the lens you are reviewing and is quieter than yours. I also own the 55-250 lens and use on the R10. This is a great lens for £80 🥳🥳🥳
I just bought one for my M50 and R50. I use it with the speed booster and it gets down to F2.8. Going to go shoot birds in a couple days and see how it does. Great video!!!
Its a fantastic lens for the price but needs a lot of Microfocus adjustment, i had to adjust my lens at -20 at tele and wide end as the lens suffers from massive front focus issue but after tuning it the results are worth the money you spend.
Not bad considering it was made for 35mm film definitely buying one 👍
I'm using the lens adapted with the Viltrox Speedbooster on my M50 which transforms it to a "53-213mm 2.8" and I got very pretty handheld wildlife-shots.
Bought it at eBay for 65€ and I'm really impressed for that budget .
Autofocus is okay for dove-shots at the beach at cloudy weather or reindeers at dawn at high shutter-speeds.
So I'm fully satisfied. Even the build quality is not that bad as you you descibe, maybe you had bad luck with yours.
For beginners or amateurs a good value in that combination.
I was looking for this kind of comment. Glad that you have it. I also have the same speedbooster and same camera. How's the lowlight performance?
I need a long zoom by next week for a formal annual dinner (mostly speeches and giving awards for employees, nothing wild).
@@astigmatik Hm that's hard to tell,it nearly is a f2.8,so it depends on available roomlight...
For a candlelight-dinner it won't be enough because of the not so good lowlight performance of the M50.
@@ISOrider72 thanks for the reply. I should just really invest in the ef-m 18-150
Still pretty good I’m actually watching it right now
My M6 mark II with Viltrox adapter or speedbooster has no problems with this lens. I got a good used one for cheap to replace a Quantaray 70-300 that was noisy and had other issues.
I just bought this lens for 80 euros. I use it for wildlife fotography with a tripod. No problems so far. Except for the noise. It's pretty loud. But it's a cheap way to get some distance between you and your "target"...
there are always some people who will always tumbs you down for no reason...but just because they are jealous of how good you are at what you do.
Far too many whiners, here. These lens is on sale for an extremely low price, now. If you expect same results as with a 2000$ lens.... well, that says it all.
The lens is actually really good on full frame. But on apsc sensors, it's basically unusable at anything over 150mm. I mean it's so soft, you can't make out any detail.
I agree it's a cheap way to get 300 mm zoom lens with an average performance. Good one for a start
Hi Chris, just one question. Why do you turn on corrections in camera? Wouldn't it be better to see how a lens performs without any corrections turned on in the camera? I know you are testing the Canon, lenses on Canon cameras which have lens corrections for Canon lenses, but it could be useful to see how the lens performs without corrections, especially for those maybe looking to get the lens to use on a non Canon camera which doesn't have corrections, where chromatic aberrations and dark corners would be more noticeable and probably not fixable on the camera like they would be on Canon cameras.
Yes Canon lenses don't fit other cameras natively (Unless you use some Cinema cameras which have a Canon EF Mount like Bkackmagic cameras or Panasonic Varicam etc..), what I meant was I meant adapting the Canon EF lenses (Not EF-S or EF-M) onto other cameras with an adaptor like a Metabones adaptor/speedbooster onto cameras like Sony, Panasonic etc...as many like to do that and those cameras don't have the Chromatic Aberrations and vignetting correction Canon cameras do. Plus those that still use older Canon cameras (I use a 600D still) those don't have the in camera corrections.
Dave's Nature Productions
Agree. He is not testing the lens. He is testing the correction software performance.... I really what to see the real CA/dark corners performance of lenses.
Hi Dave's Nature. It's a fair question and one that I've often wondered if I got right. Ultimately, the reason I decided to test with corrections 'on' is that a huge number of people will be shooting like that anyway. But of course, I know there are advantages and disadvantages in presenting test pictures from either way
Very good review regarding the 200 to 300mm range. The image quality at 300mm was almost pathetic. From 75 to 200mm it's average at best. Thank you.
So, that cheapo lens are designed for full frame? I'm quite suprised by the price.
it's an old lens from the film day :) that's why it's full frame :)
Certainly not a bad lens, but I found the auto focus speed really slow for my sports photos
Manually focus makes up for auto focus.... good vid
So happy I came across this video this was very helpful, as I was looking for my first telephoto lens.
I tapped the name on the research bar and I clicked randomly on a video
I was glad to hear your voice
You make a hell of reviews mate
The review was good, but it does miss the point of a review. I'm a beginner photographer, and this is a really good lens for beginners it makes you work and gets the job done, and this review does make this lens look like a bad option. If you are a higher-level photographer this lens is not for you, but the price tag alone most of the time answers that question.
Does these lens work great in the dark? I just need lens for dark pictures
Using a Canon R6ii (EF adapted) with a 24 Mpx sensor and *in-camera* stabilization -- we suddenly have a very workable lightweight all-day walking-around tele-zoom. Okay, not the greatest autofocusing system, but I mostly manually focus anyway. Brand new they're going for $200 -- so hardly a major risk if I wind up unhappy.
I am getting this lens once again, and can't wait to test it with my a6300 with speed booster. Only thing that worries me a little now is that extremely long focus distance. But let see.
how was it? does it works well?
@@_abdshukor_ you get 2.8-4 aperture and lens gets much wider. Also shorter. And background looks blurrier.
Does this lens work on the Canon 5D Mark iii or which cost friendly lens would you recommend for the Canon 5D Mark iii
Yes. All Canon mount lenses made since 1987 will work on your Canon APS-C digital SLR camera, except EF-M lenses
Dude... Send my your body. You have clearly no clue how to use it^^ I'll send you my backup 1300d^^
So if I want to use it for panoramic stitching in landscape photography it is a very good lense because all that matters in this condition is sharpness at 200 to 300 mm !! Thanks for the review
Mildly interesting story maybe; so my girlfriend bought a Canon T5 kit and this lens came with it. She never ended up using it and put it on storage after she bought a 50mm 1.8. She forgot she even had it. Fast forward and I upgrade from the SL2 to EOS RP and I buy the EOS-R to EF adapter so I can use my own 35mm EF lens. We ended up cleaning out the storage a couple weeks later and we find the EF 75-300 III and I'm like wtf, this is an EF lens. She said she didn't like it on her smaller sensor so I took it home to try it out. And yeah, it's sharp on a full frame. It works well. Not bad for a free find basically. I did give her my SL2 and sold her T5.
Hmm, interesting. I am looking at the EOS R possibly in the future, and need a longer lens for occasional wildlife. Not much money will be left and this lens is super cheap. Did you have any focusing issues and did it work really well overall?
@@timgodfrey5738 Tim Godfrey the lens is crazy good, even disregarding price. It's tack sharp. But it's only really sharp on a full frame. It also doesn't have IS so you will need to crank that shutter speed unfortunately. But this shouldn't be a problem with lots of light. At 300mm, it can be a little rough to get a sharp image due to the lack of IS but it is possible. Good luck buddy. I like the lens. I've taken some great pictures with it and haven't had any issue focusing with it. It focuses faster on the RF bodies than the APS-C bodies.
@@StatusQuo209 Thank you for the prompt reply! I appreciate the insight. The lack of IS is for sure disappointing, but the price is so affordable. Plus, part of the time I would be shooting at high shutter speeds anyway, and when I can't, the EOS R's greatly improved high ISO performance compared to my current camera (600D/3Ti), I should be able to make it work by giving me more room to play with to bump up the shutter speed. If it is sharp, then I at least have a viable worst case scenario solution :-). Thanks again!
I have 2 of these. Gen 2 and gen 3. Liked the 2 better. 3 was a little slower to focus. Great begginer lens
Your original review was right on. I do not like this lens. The best but diet zoom is still the Tamron SP 70-300.
Never thought a full frame lense would work better for full frame camers😂😂 exellent video though. I still may buy this lens for my film cameras.
Very Surprised how this lens performed much better on a full frame camera :O
For my first efs lens on my r10, this is a nice starter lens, I believe my r10 has digital stabilize so I've had some great photos at the max zoom but my next lens will be a 70-200 2.8 g2
Hi Christopher!
I have this lens lens lying around at my place, belongs to my girlfriend, and I personally own a Sony a7iii.
My question is, would it be a good idea if I get an adapter for this lens to use with my Sony?
How do you think the autofocus would perform?
Thanks! :)
Keep up the good work 👍🏼
Probably not good at all, I imagine
Hey Chris, did you ever do a review of the EF-M mount that you use for the M3? I've got a few friends that use the M3 but they've no idea that you can use the EF lenses and I would like to point them to a video to show how easy it is to use it.
How about the focus? Is is much better to STM?
Does it have image stabilizer?
FYI before you buy: the fringing/chromatic aberration makes this lens simply unusable for any backlit subject.
Hey, Christophger, any chance to test the 70-210 USM or 100-300 USM? Thanks!
I’m using the 75-300mm and 18-135mm lenses for shots of the moon where I need less light coming in. Just as your tests pointed out that when stopped down to f/8 through pretty much the entire zoom range, it is sharp although I must point out that I’m using a t5i. Hope I can grab a full frame body to run these lenses some time in the near future. Would love to see the difference myself. Overall for me, this lens has been a great starting point so far especially when it comes to composition and Astrophotography.
I picked up one of these (yet to be shipped) for $45US. I'm new to the game but I'm curious how this will fair with the viltrox speed booster. Any experience pairing the two? Will be used on a canon M50
Haven't tried it
Im a owner of canon m50m2 i'm looking for a good telephoto budget lens but unfortunately which ever lens i have seen i only got a negative review for you. Im seriously confused now 😪. I saw tamron70300mmLD, Canon EFM55200 and now Canon 75300mm USM . Im now confused to pick one
When using my older systems, like my 1d classic or my 10d focus is vastly improved but this lens cannot be used with modern day cross type phase, detect af in servo mode effectively On contrast, detect systems, it’s smoothly transitions between points very well as on the tech systems it kind of jumps between points completely completely missing them in the process
so the lens has a few faults what do you expect for a cheap lens.i have a 75 x 300 lens and i find it very good for the price.
New photographer here. Will this work on my rebel T7?
If its ef/efs, it Will work!
I waited for this video dude! Love you!
Can you use 3000D
Why is there such a big difference in image quality between full frame and aps-c?
This moster purple fringing really killed a photo that I took of a bird. In my 20D (jurassic, I know) it really killed the details.
LOL hilarious review. Thank you for honest opinions and getting the piss out in the most driest ways lol
I don't mind fringing, distortions, soft edges and all, but it only works for some style of videos and not everything so it should work for some projects but never for any product photography or interviews. Best for music videos, short films and the art side of things.
By the way, which lens should I get that's wider, good zoom and fast, for Canon 60D? I don't mind the mentioned effects and I don't mind no image stabilization, as long as it's manual. Id like to use it for establishing and master shots mostly and some trippy close-ups, where the bokeh is crazy
I have this lens right now, I was looking into maybe getting the tamron sp70-300mm lens... would you think I would get any benefits from switching lens?
Would it work for eos m50 ?
This, sigma or tamron 70-300? I am talking about the cheap ones.
I would get this Canon lens
@@christopherfrost thank you! I finally bought the 55-250 canon
I dislike this lens so much, I'm glad it was offered as a kit lens at a bargain $450 with the Canon 1200d, it was such a pain shooting with it and it was heavily inconvenient, the only "accurate" photos I got out of it were sunset photos and that's about it.
If a lens this cheap is this sharp on full frame it'll be good for me to pick out details in architecture and create flat, almost 2D looking images. The hideous AF doesn't matter as I usually focus manually when doing these photos
I learned photography on this lens and it was such a pain. LOL
So... you "learn".
he learned but it was a painful... it was hard, difficult, Chinese arithmetic.. if he learned off this lens just imagine on a real real good one...
This helped me a lot. Thanks.
Hey I have the
"Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II" but I just got a new lends that is the "Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 SP Di VC USD XLD" I'm not a pro photographer but I'm having a hard time noticing the difference between the two besides that the tameron goes 50mm more in distance, I like to shoot wildlife and I was watching one of your other videos where you are reviewing the the canon 70-300 I believe and you suggested that tamron was sharper is you wanted to shoot things like wildlife. So I just want to know basically if it's worth me keeping this lends since I feel like the canon 55-250 is just as good, they seem to be both sharp I'm having a hard time telling the diffrance. If anyone can help me out I'd appreciate it. I dont want to spend money on somthing that I kinda already have and maybe put the tamron money into a nice canon macro 100mm instead. Thank you!
Work a bit more with the lenses you have, and keep the one that seems to work best for you :-)
Being a broke ass university student in need of a lens for his DSLR. the price range is good.
Presenting, the ONLY good (enough) lens that people can afford
What’s good 3 lens for Canon 7d EOS camera ?
Thank you
Great, detailed review. Thanks.
Hey would you recommend this lens for beginners? I use this lens at my high school for events.
Not really. Try to find a lens with image stabilization instead ('IS')
Can you test out the Canon 70-300 IS II USM? Thanks.
It would be interesting to pair this with Canon R6. R5 would probably be too much for it. I had this one on my 550d and i remember hating it. Everything from shaky shots to purple fringing and clunkiness. But i didn't expected such excellent results on ff. But again 20 mp is not alot and this would have been more then enough back when it was designed.
You always lose a stop or two with any adapter.
@@acedia4453 there is no glass in the adapter when using it with the canon r5 mirror less camera.
How much magnification does it provides?
So would this lens have affect with the crop factor? so for a aps-c sensor camera it would be 120-480?
Every lens is like this on apsc. It’s called crop for this very reason. Your sensor only “sees” the inner part of the whole picture from the lens, makes it look more zoomed in
which one is better ...canon 75-300mm or Sigma 70-300 DG Macro
Sigma.
Would it be decent for video? I need a big zoom for some corporate events but in a tight budget. Would use it with a GH5S so lowlight isn’t really an issue
It won't be very good for video. You would need a very good quality video tripod
Can i use canon 3000d...
IS IT SUPPORT WITH EOS 1500D?
you should try to use. APS-C camera like 1200D not you mirrorless camera where you use adapter.
So it's better to test on an 18 megapixel camera than a 24 megapixel camera, because of an adaptor that has no real effect on image quality?
I am going to go outside and take a few more shots with my IS version of this lens at f8.
Bro the photos what you are shown are unedited...?
I have M50 eos with canon monut adapter, and I have a 55-250 STM lens what do you suggest me because I want to more zoom,
Im buying this. Thanks for the review.
is this lens is awesome?
Is it good ?
I just wanna know if i can make a successful photo shoot to my upcoming 1st birthday daughter because I’m a beginner at this
If you're standing about 5 meters away from her then yes! You might want a wider angle lens with a bright maximum aperture, like the Canon 50mm f/1.8 (if you have a Canon camera)
Boss.. what is best for music video shoot.. 70 - 300 mm vs 75 - 300 ????
It depends which one you're talking about, there are many, many 70-300mm lenses
Does this fit cannon 2000D?
How is it with the canon r5 that has in body stabilization?
I wanna take pictures of trains and planes with good quality buy also good zoom. Shall I go with this lens or the image stabiliser 55-250mm also mentioned in the video?
The 55-250
It will be great to review 80-200mm f2.8L (Magic Drainpipe) ;)
What aspect ratio has ?
2:20 Curious and excited but confused beginner here - can you please explain "full time manual focus"? You said you have to switch to manual focus, then you immediately talk about the "auto focus mode." Please help!
With some lenses, you should not try to turn the focus ring when the lens is set to autofocus mode. With other lenses, you can turn the focus ring at any time, which is known as 'full-time manual focus'
Makes sense! When the lens is in AF you can feel the resistance if you turn to focus by hand. Much obliged!
Ohh, okay - don't do that anymore! ;-)
Your original review was more accurate. I have one of these lenses and they are not good on a full frame (5D mk i). I agree with the comments below that any in camera lens correction should be turned off for these tests.
Well, I've put the test results right there for everyone to see the proof: if focused properly, it does indeed perform (surprisingly) great on FF.
Hi Chris, thanks for the response. Have no issues with your sharpness tests although I find this lens a little softer at 300mm f5.6 on my FF. My issue was should lens correction be on or off. Having read your reply to Dave's Nature below I can see the reasoning behind it. Sorry to have raised this issue but I rate your reviews very highly, they are the best I've come across on UA-cam.
Andrew Wilkin o
@@andrewwilkin1923 There is a lot of sample variation in lenses, and many budget lenses are built to somewhat approximate standards. This is one of those.
@@christopherfrost The biggest problem with this lens on full frame, based on two samples I've used, is the AF error at the long end, which for me has exceeded the adjustment capability of the 6D's AF microadjust...so in practice I found it very hard to focus accurately at 300mm.
The non usm is also good? I would like to buy a cheap lens for my fullframe.
I haven't tested it I'm afraid
It's optically identical and I didn't notice a mechanical difference in spite of the USM label on this one.
Is 55-200 also enough for wildlife photography?
The 55-250mm Canon lens is, I would say, a rather good choice for wildlife photography. Though you lose those 50mm, it's image stabilization makes the longer end of the focal length more accessible. That's not to say that the 75-300mm is unusable at 300mm. I've used it on my Rebel t5i for nearly 3 years now. This lens is certainly on the inexpensive side, but if you have the money for a little more of a lens, I would highly recommend either the Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 SP Di VC USD XLD or the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 is II USM Lens. Both with image stabilization, and both with the great reach of 300mm that will be excellent for things like birds, which is usually what I like taking pictures of.
55-250 STM beats the shit out of this garbage. The 55-250 STM is nearly an L lens.
"It's not a complete plastic piece of garbage"
- Christopher Frost - 2017.