----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Jameson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(message snipped for length)
> I get amazed at what gets dumped on the EF 75-300 IS. I'm not
> doubting Skip's experience, but it doesn't match mine.....I've
> been quite pleased with the results with my EF 75-300 IS...
Bill:
I tend to agree with you. I think the 75-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM gets a bad rap
to a large degree. It may not have perfect optics, but there are a lot of
other lenses that fall into that category, and on balance, I think it's a
very good lens. I had one but chose to go with the 70-200 plus a 1.4X
extender to accomplish the (near) 300mm focal range. While I had the
75-300 IS though, I got some very nice shots, several of wildlife that
enlarged to 8X10 nicely. The IS worked very well and came through when I
needed it. The lens was a great size and certainly did not present the same
discomfort as does the 100-400 when lugging it around all day. It also
pointed nicely...you know, a good "feel" to it. I think the only down side
was it's lens creep which it was very prone to doing (and which I actually
fixed with a small black rubber band). I believe Art Morris commented that
until the 100-400 came out, the 75-300 was "the" safari lens to have.
Gary Russell
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
