At 8:52 PM -0800 11/16/00, Skip wrote:
>The 100-300USM is well spoken of, a true ring USM, and the build quality
>is far superior to the 75-300, whether it is USM, IS or none of the
>above. [...]
I have owned and used both lenses - the 75-300 USM II and the
100-300 USM. As noted the build quality of the 100-300 is definitely
superior, and it also gives you a non-rotating end and full-time
manual focusing. The 100-300 feels like a stretch version of the
popular 28-105.
Optically, however, the 100-300 was only marginally better than the
75-300. I could tell a difference in sharpness and contrast upon very
close examination of some test photos, but it was extremely minor.
And the 75-300 at 100 looked slightly better than the 100-300 at 100.
- Neil K.
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
