Lens Recommendation

Hi,

I currently have a Canon EOS 20d and a canon 17-85 IS lens.
I am planning to purchase a second lens.
I am looking at the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM and the EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6
DO IS USM
I like to DO lens because it’s smaller, even though it’s a bit heavier.
I’ve read reviews, but I would like some more opinions, so any comments
would be welcome.

TIA

Gadi

Gadi Ben-Avi wrote:
Hi,

I currently have a Canon EOS 20d and a canon 17-85 IS lens.
I am planning to purchase a second lens.
I am looking at the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM and the EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6
DO IS USM
I like to DO lens because it’s smaller, even though it’s a bit heavier.
I’ve read reviews, but I would like some more opinions, so any comments
would be welcome.

I don't use either, but everywhere I've seen them compared, they say the
only good thing about the DO lens is the size/weight.


--
Bertrand

"Gadi Ben-Avi" wrote in message
...
Hi,

I currently have a Canon EOS 20d and a canon 17-85 IS lens.
I am planning to purchase a second lens.
I am looking at the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM and the EF 70-300mm
f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM
I like to DO lens because it’s smaller, even though it’s a bit heavier.
I’ve read reviews, but I would like some more opinions, so any comments
would be welcome.

TIA

Gadi

I bought the 70-300 (your first option) early on, and have become
increasingly frustrated with it, especially after having used better lenses.
I can only recommend that you take the money you would spend on either of
those and wait until you have enough saved up for an L glass.

The 70-300 is "acceptable" (except at the extreme 300mm range), but you'll
wonder why your photos are never as sharp and clear as others you've seen.

dwight

"Ofnuts" wrote in message
...
Gadi Ben-Avi wrote:
Hi,

I currently have a Canon EOS 20d and a canon 17-85 IS lens.
I am planning to purchase a second lens.
I am looking at the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM and the EF 70-300mm
f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM
I like to DO lens because it’s smaller, even though it’s a bit heavier.
I’ve read reviews, but I would like some more opinions, so any comments
would be welcome.

I don't use either, but everywhere I've seen them compared, they say the
only good thing about the DO lens is the size/weight.


--
Bertrand

I changed my 75-300 "plain" USM lens for the 70-300 IS USM lens and I
haven't regretted it at all.
I also have the 17-85 IS lens but the IS really does help with distant,
moving subjects, both with framing them and getting the shot. 1/60 is a
feasible shutter speed at 300mm.

For me, weight and price are more important than size so I didn't consider
the DO.

Hope this helps,

Ian.

I've shot with the 75-300 DO. it is light weight and fast focusing. it takes
smaller filters. it is very sharp between 75-210 (or so) and then gets
rather soft from there out to 300mm. No surprises there but you should be
aware.

From what I remember, it is sharpest between f/8 and f/11.

Steve
Tucson AZ
"Gadi Ben-Avi" wrote in message
...
Hi,

I currently have a Canon EOS 20d and a canon 17-85 IS lens.
I am planning to purchase a second lens.
I am looking at the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM and the EF 70-300mm
f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM
I like to DO lens because it's smaller, even though it's a bit heavier.
I've read reviews, but I would like some more opinions, so any comments
would be welcome.

TIA

Gadi