canon 90-300?

[crazee horse]

has anyone got any experience with the canon Canon EF 90-300mm f4.5-5.6 Auto Focus USM? ive been looking at lens and stuff but being a totall novice its easily to be blinded by bull in the shop. i want a bit of range thats all and a bit of an all rounder. ive found this lens cheap as chips too £119.99! any body got a quick verdict?

yes im new to this and in camera terms a bit thick lol so please go easy.......

[yelvertoft]

crazee,

I have no knowledge of this lens, but it would help others advise if you could explain a bit more about the kind of usage you are going to give it. What sort of things do you want to take pictures of with this lens, how often are you going to use it, is this going to be used as your everyday workhorse lens, or a now and again lens? Still life, moving objects, candid street stuff, landscapes, with or without tripod, etc. Daylight, night time, ........

You get the idea. Sorry to bombard you with questions, but just about any lens can be good or bad in a particular set of circumstances and it would help others advise if they knew what your usage was going to be.

Regards,

Duncan

[Birdsnapper]

Crazee, try fredmiranda.com for lens reviews by users.

[crazee horse]

sorry, i like to take wildlife pictures and things from afar but am on a bit of a budget, i really want a bit of an all rounder for birds and the like! and a bit of still life too!

[robski]

As with most budget lens they have a sweet spot and if your work within that sweet spot your get some decent results.

So in good light where you can stop down the lens to f8 - f11 and keep to the 90 - 200mm of the zoom range will be it's sweet spot.

Workable for static subjects.

Wide open at 300mm will disapoint with soft images.

Another lens to consider is
70-300mm F4-5.6 APO Macro DG which maybe a tad better.

So what will paying more give you.

Normally a better build quality which is useful if this is your everyday lens.

Faster AF motor good for subjects on the move.

Improved optics that tend to be sharp wide open and less prone to colour fringing especially on the border of the frame. Even sharpness across the frame.

The 90-300mm is good for the money as long as you know it's limitations.

If you are serious about bird photography it won't be long before you meet these limits and you have to dig alot deeper into your pocket for some quality glassware. Secondhand quality glass is still expensive in terms of the 90-300mm.

[sassan]

Also mbkamrani has one of that lenses.
Here is a link to one of his pictures taken with it.
LINK
You may want to PM him for more info.

[miketoll]

From what I can remember of a revue eons ago it was very ''ordinary.'' Nothing actually wrong with it but very much designed and built down to a price. Think some of the Sigma stuff at a similar price probably better.

[crazee horse]

dare i say ive been looking at this............... http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/BRAND-NEW-SIGM...QQcmdZViewItem

[miketoll]

Always got good write-ups for the price, the APO version a bit better.

[crazee horse]

er............. whats APO?