> Chris Eastwood [mailto:cjeastwd@;gol.com] wrote: > I've got one, and while it is not optically as nice as my > Sigma APO 75-300 the AF is FANTASTIC, I would recommned > this lens on its af abilitys alone.
I concur with Chris. For the last three days I've been shooting International Gay Games Touch Footy matches with this lens. It just snaps into focus so quickly (and quietly), it makes this amateur's job (I'm doing it for the local Footy club of which I'm a groupie as opposed to player <g>) a damn site easier. It's not a valid comparison in results for obvious reasons, but going from manually focussing my Olympus OM1 with 50 1.8, to the 28-80 3.5-4.5 on the Canon, then this 100-300 USM is a massive evolution in focussing. I wish it could teach me how to compose as well ;-) As someone said, I too have heard that it is too soft wide open at the long end. As such, I tend to only shoot it at f8 if possible, but, to be honest, in the footy and softball shots I've taken (I actually *play* softball :-) ), I've not noticed its softness in the results *to my standards* (which may be less than yours, and are almost exclusively 5x7" prints). (Note, I have no experience with the 75-300's, though I know there's some fan's of the 75-300IS lens here, which is reputedly similar, though possibly less, soft at the long end wide open, but with the IS benefit). It ain't an "L", but of the options it suited my abilities and budget, and I'm pretty happy with it. Other than the true USM, don't forget the full-time manual focussing and the non-rotating front element, if they matter to you too! (and all this doesn't mean I didn't yearn for a 100-400 IS or 70-200 2.8 IS with 2X over the last few days...weeks, months (a bad case of gear envy I do have sometimes <g>, and you undoubtedly gets what you pays for) The pictures *will* end up on the web, though I doubt that is cabable of proving much (that, and the middle-of-the-day light I have to shoot in...). Here, FWIW, are some "I made earlier" on the referred clubs' websites... http://www.geocities.com/touch_footy/origin2.htm http://www.geocities.com/sydneyoutfielders/Photo00001.html (the last 19 aren't mine) http://www.geocities.com/sydneyoutfielders/Tue1/Tue1.html http://www.geocities.com/sydneyoutfielders/tue2/tuesday2.htm Nature/wildlife? Sorry, David, I haven't done any. I wonder if you'd consider a prime instead, of which I'm sure others would have some suggestions (I've always been curious how the 200 2.8L goes with the convertors...then there's the 300 4.0L...then [sigh]) Cheers Marc Sydney, Oz * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
