What is the functional difference between this lens and this one: EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III USM Lens?
1809710
The biggest difference is the focal length, the other features are very similar in both.
1809711
since the aperture (f) is the same for both, the difference is the zoom. the 75 starts magnified more and can zoom in more than a 50-250. so 75-300 starts closer to the object and ends farther
1494491
I don't see anything different here. The only issue I've had with the lens is to make sure it is properly locked and seated.
395636
No, the one for the 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G lens is the HB-57, it's has a little larger opening than the 55-200 (I own both lenses).
1299324
Yes - Review of the better lens and differences between the two can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap0NQfWuKKE
1104569
According to what I can find, it does. I do not personally have the ef 75-300 f/ 4-5.6 so I do not have personal experience with the lens.
914060
This lens is the later version. It is much lighter to carry and is both faster and not nearly as heavy. Mine is near new but I am going to sell it only to buy a new prime lens that I want.
1939949
50mm f1.4 features Ultra Sonic Motor (USM) which make the lens to focus much faster, quieter and accurate. I have both the 50mm 1.4 and 1.8, and the 1.8 has been kept inside my dry box for a long time after I upgraded to the 1.4. As others said, the f1.4 uses better glass which gives better optic quality, metal EF mounting which is more durable.
851241
I tried both side-by-side. F/3.5 model focused noticeably faster in low light. It also has a better build. On the other hand it is larger, heavier and uses more expensive 82mm filters (F/4-5.6 uses 77mm filters). Plus at the time I purchased it, the 4-5.6 model cost $407$ at my local store and the 3.5 model cost $649, which is $250 difference. At that price difference you might as well get excellently reviewed Tokina 11-16 constant F/2.8. Some food for thought
997238
The "EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III" isn't designed to use a lens collar at all, it has no location to fit any collar around it, and it isn't heavy enough to need one either. I have the "70-300mm F/4.0-5.6L IS USM" and that one is a heavy beast and is clearly designed for a collar, and benefits from using one. I do have the Photodiox collar for that lens and can say they do make great products for the price, assuming they claim compatibility for your lens.
1316305
Yes. They are about the same although you lose a stop of aperture with the 70-300. The maximum aperture is f/5.6 instead of f/4. The 70-300 lens is only f/4 near the 70mm end. Otherwise, optically in terms of sharpness, it's about the same.
1316302
I also own a 300mm f/4L IS. I use it with a Canon 7D. The 70-300 mm f.4-5.6 L IS (note the L, which means professional quality lens) is used with a Canon Rebel T4i. The two systems give about the same quality pictures, but I have never done one-to-one comparisons where the same body is used with both lenses on the same subject with the same lighting. The consumer zoom lens (without the L) is nowhere near as good as either professional lens.
1316304
I owned the 300 f4 and replaced it with the 70-300 L which for me is a better alternative. The additional length makes a huge difference; I also owned the 70-200 F4, a wonderful lens but I find I no longer use since I have the 70-300L. There is NO comparison between the non-L version of 70-300 & the L version. This is a terrific lens & you will be happy with it.
2096569
the only differences between the two lenses are: 1) focal length and 2) price. The 18-300 is approx. $150 more than the 18-200. If you are shooting sports or wildlife, and can afford the higher price, I would definitely go with the 18-300 for the longer reach. However, I personally own the 18-200 and love it for 98% of the shooting I do
164750
It says Canon on the barrel of the lens, but beyond that I do not know. I will add that I also have an older Canon EF75-300 lens & it feels a bit heavier than this new one, but I have already used the new one for 100+ photos & it is working just fine.
1923724
I am not familiar with that lens, but I was not pleased with the results with the 75-300 lens I used with it. I got a halo effect and the pictures were hazy
403395
Yes, the length changes depending on the focusing distance. The 300mm f4 has internal focusing and also focuses closer. I found the 300 to be a much better lens overall even though the field of view is narrower. Of course it is more expensive but I love it.
994207
The 2 lenses are good, but the main difference is on how sensitive the lens is. In the one i bought, it's lowest f-stop is 4. you need more light for avoiding grain. The one you are referring to works better in a low light condition (f 2.8).