SLRGear.com: Interactive Lens Reviews and Opinion.
Digital Camera ReviewsDiscuss lenses in the SLRgear.com Forums (separate login!)



Reviews Views Date of last review
14 72565 8/22/2012
Recommended By Average Purchase
43% of reviewers $193.67
Reader Review Rating Averages
Readers' rating for
Construction Quality
Readers' rating for
Image Quality
Readers'
Overall Rating
spacerspacer
4.57
spacerspacer
4.57
spacerspacer
4.79
1EF75-300f4-56IIIa.jpg


Keywords: Canon EF Tele Zoom 35mm USM


mark27

Registered: August 2012
Posts: 1
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by mark27
Review Date: 8/22/2012 Would you recommend the product? No | Total Spent: $165.00| Rating: 3 

 
Pros: auto focus
Cons: not Smooth Zoom , soft

I am surprised Canon would even release this product.
I have been using SRL cameras since 70s NEVER seen or own a lens so rough. The auto focus works great but the zoom utterly sucks. I would never buy this lens.
Perhaps one starting out in photography that really does not plan to use it beyond the family pinic? otherwise wasted money.
rather surprised at canon.
PS all my other cameras were Minolta, Nikon and Sony so this does not create good faith in Canon.
bungot800

Registered: September 2011
Posts: 1
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by bungot800
Review Date: 9/17/2011 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 8 

 
Pros:
Cons:

...this lens is great!!
GeorgiaJedi

Registered: November 2008
Posts: 4
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by GeorgiaJedi
Review Date: 11/14/2008 Would you recommend the product? No | Total Spent: $150.00| Rating: 5 

 
Pros: Cheap, light, simple
Cons: Cheap, light, simple, slow, aperture

I've been using SLR's since the late 80's (started with tho good ol' Petax K1000 with a 50mm, 70-300, and 500). This is possibly the cheapest lens, price and quality, I have ever used. If it hadn't been included in my kit I would not have spent the money on it. Too slow and limited aperture. With a good, solid tripod you can work some great pics, but otherwise, expect soft and/or poor focus, esp. at the long range...
onlyone

Registered: May 2008
Posts: 8
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by onlyone
Review Date: 6/1/2008 Would you recommend the product? No | Total Spent: $120.00| Rating: 3 

 
Pros: Very cheap
Cons: Everything except cheap !!!

It was my fault to hope this budget len gonna give some good thing.


Soft picture, not even longest focus, Low contrast, Silly AF and disappointed construction.


It's good to someone who want a cheap telephoto zoom len, but if you have more patient, keep your money to buy a little more expensive len, you will get something better for your DSLR.


I sold it in 2 weeks after I bought it as a second hand len from my friend.
hitendra

Registered: February 2007
Posts: 11
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by hitendra
Review Date: 1/19/2008 Would you recommend the product? No | Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Good for starters.
Cons: Soft.

Save money and buy better lens.
Check IQ hereā€¦
http://www.hitendrasinkar.com/photoblog/index.php?x=browse&category=31&pagenum=1
gerrit_smit

Registered: December 2007
Posts: 1
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by gerrit_smit
Review Date: 12/7/2007 Would you recommend the product? No | Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 3 

 
Pros: Cheap
Cons: Not sharp

I simply can't get sharp pictures with this lens. Even shooting at brigth daylight, my pictures are not sharp, especially at 300mm
amollambe

Registered: October 2007
Posts: 1
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by amollambe
Review Date: 10/14/2007 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $290.00| Rating: 5 

 
Pros: It's not such a bad lens as it was quoted in some of the reviews.
Cons: Soft

http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z165/amollambe/BIRD-4.jpg


http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z165/amollambe/LAZY-DEER-AT-LUNCH.gif


http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z165/amollambe/lost-deer-copy.jpg
Razzd

Registered: February 2007
Posts: 4
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by Razzd
Review Date: 6/13/2007 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $208.00| Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Cheap, 300mm, USM, Lightweight, Good (decent) image quality & relatively fast AF
Cons: Low build quality, zoom creep, non-IF, no IS

I'd only recommend this lens if you don't want to spend 3.5x the price for the Canon 70-300mm IS USM.


A decent beginner lens, but lack of IS (at this price) makes a tripod mandatory at 300mm.


Build quality is below avg, plastic-feel all-round, zoom'ing not smooth.


However image quality is surprising good and the AF quick enough (provided there is sufficient light).
ckhorne

Registered: January 2007
Posts: 8
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by ckhorne
Review Date: 1/14/2007 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $225.00| Rating: 3 

 
Pros: Inexpensive. 300mm
Cons: Cheap build and poor quality

This lens is inexpensive, but you get what you pay for. The focus system is a little slow and the images are not very sharp and do not have much contrast.


However, it is a good, cheap, beginner lens. At 300mm, you will need a tripod (as with most any 300mm); if you want a 300mm without using a tripod, look for one that has Image Stabilization.


Overall, I wouldn't recommend this lens unless you need a very cheap lens for "just in case".
gadgetguy

Registered: May 2006
Posts: 62
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by gadgetguy
Review Date: 12/30/2006 Would you recommend the product? No | Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 5 

 
Pros: cheap
Cons: practically unuseable - especially in the long end, poor colors and contrast

Don't let this lens' cheap and long zoom price tempt you - it's too slow to use on the long end in anything but the brightest sunlight and if you plan to print 8x10 or larger, you may be disappointed with the results.
philhirn

Registered: December 2006
Posts: 5
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by philhirn
Review Date: 12/28/2006 Would you recommend the product? No | Total Spent: $100.00| Rating: 4 

 
Pros: cheap, good range
Cons: image quality, wobbly

Well, if you have no other choice, it makes pictures, but it will be hard to get a sharp picture at 200+mm out of it.
mu55ster

Registered: October 2005
Posts: 9
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by mu55ster
Review Date: 11/17/2006 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 6 

 
Pros: good basic telephoto range
Cons: slow apature, and needs to be stopped down

A good second lens for beginners - light, lets you experiance the range and decide if you need a better zoom - other lenses are better/sharper (thinking of most 70-200mm lenses). lens is fine for most users but if you do shoot primarily in the telephoto range there are better ways to go. Ok as a travel lens but again - it's always better to save up alittle and get one good lens rather than getting cheap ones to fill out your lens range.
b0xii

Registered: August 2006
Posts: 1
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by b0xii
Review Date: 8/28/2006 Would you recommend the product? No | Total Spent: $200.00| Rating: 2 

 
Pros: cheap
Cons: very poor image quality

I purchased this lens hoping to get away with good image quality without breaking the bank. Needless to say, my experiment failed. In order to get good image quality with this lens, you'll need TONS of light and go ahead and forget about the 200-300mm range. Maybe I just got a lemon...but I think not. Like the saying goes, 'You get what you pay for'.
ramindia

Registered: February 2006
Posts: 1
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM review by ramindia
Review Date: 5/23/2006 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $285.00| Rating: 7 

 
Pros: + quick zoom + sharp focus
Cons:

I am an amateur, but very enthusiastic and a fast learner. (I may not be aware of certain things while writing this review)


I found some "play" in the zoom ring. I am not sure if it is a defect in this specific unit, or it is normal.


Sometimes, the AF also cannot focus correctly. Specially when the light is not very bright


 






This document copyright © 2009-2014, SLRgear.com, all rights reserved.