Compact Cheaper than most Good lens to start with Image quality is overall pretty good 58mm filter size saves you money.

f/5.6 is fairly slow Image quality not the best zoomed in past 200mm Not built very tough

Lets not beat around the bush here...this isn't the best zoom lens out there and is probably one of the weaker lenses that Canon makes. That said, it IS a Canon and produces pretty decent results...much better than buying a Phoenix lens or whatever. It is a great travel lens, being so compact for 300mm. It is a good value being priced at less than $200 most places, and it is a great lens for beginners. I learned a lot about photography while using this lens. The resale value actually tends to be pretty good(as with most Canon products) so you can learn with it for a while and move on later if you think you need something more solid. Causal photographers will find that this is a pretty good lens to own.

Customer Service

Never Used

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 USM

At the time I bought it, I was on a strict budget; it was cheap.

everything! Save your money and do a little research and find something better.

I'd pass on this one! This is actually the second canon 75-300 lense I've had. The first one, Canon's QC department must have been asleep, as I zoomed once and it refused to zoom afterwards. I sent it back to the dealer that I purchased it from, they exchanged it and the second one wasn't much better. The barrel that holds the lenses wobbles, if pointing the lens towards the ground, it will extend by itself, oh and it's slow. In retrospect, I should have gone with something else. Before I switched over to the EOS system, I had a canon 100-300 FD and it was phenominal. Solid, fast & clear.

Similar Products Used:

Canon 100-300 FD. Promaster 100-300

Sharp and colorful photos, not too heavy/big, zoom has a good feel with no creep.

not fast enough for low light shooting, USM is not all that quiet or fast.

I've been using this lens for a month with my new Canon Digital Rebel, and I think this lens is really better than what most reviewers say. It's capable of taking sharp photos with good colors and contrast. I think the digital rebel's higher saturation/contrast/sharpness setting has something to do with it, but in any case, a great lens at the price point for a digital slr. My only regret is not getting the IS version for sharper handheld shots at lower shutter speeds.

Customer Service

n/a

Similar Products Used:

Canon 50mm f1.8

* Range of focal lengths

* Image quality: weak contrast, sharpness, distortion. Especially at long end. * Sits heavy in the bag given the frequency of use knowing its image quality * Bad balance on EOS 500n (Rebel-G), even with battery pack/grip

Since I am more of a wide angle photographer, I have used this lens far lens than my 20 and 28 primes... I love some of the shots I did take with this lens though, as far as I did not go beyond 100 or 135mm. At the long end the pictures become fuzzy, without contrast, and maybe also with a tendency towards a cyan cast (but this may be the air itself). You can easily check while scanning slides... look at the histogram and see there is no black in the images. Sharpness is probably acceptable at shorter focal lengths for ordinary sized prints. I would seriously consider a high end zoom lens (or prime) if you like to do a lot of tele work. Even in prints the low contrast and softness is visible. By the way, forget doing macros with close-up attachments (as I tried once), it sucks :-)

Mk II nicely sharp cheap.

later models not so sharp. still reasonable for the money. rotating barrel not brilliantly sealed

This is for the MkII version, USM equipped. My old MkII is really very reasonably sharp; much better than the newer ones IME. Certainly not the quickest to focus but that is primarily because light gets a little short at 300mm on anything less than a 2.8 lense. For the money I can't really complain about this but it does knock its sporting capabilites down a peg or three. Rotating barrel bothers some but not me. Better with a hood, as always

Customer Service

never needed

Similar Products Used:

various consumer and L lenses

Comparatively cheap & light.

Hunts a lot if the viewfinder contains "disturbing" twigs/leaves.

I use this for bird photography mostly, and sometimes for butterfly photography. Given my budget constraints at the time when i bought this, along with an EOS50 body for INR 30K, i guess it was a good choice. The problem of occasional softness in the pix sometimes drives me mad.

Customer Service

-NA-

Similar Products Used:

-NA-

USM motor pretty quiet zoom range extensive(good value) 58 mm filters

Extending barrel irritating when using polariser. Barrel feels flimsy and looks it. Image quality severely lacking, even in bright sunlight. I find slides fuzzy and below what I expected from Canon glass( yes I know it's a consumer zoom). doesn't seem to have much exchange value. Overall, others have said it, but if you are starting out, it'll do for practice but do yourself a favour and ditch it a.s.a.p

An OK lense for those starting out and needing extended range. If you are in any way critical of image quality, you'll ditch this as soon as you can afford something better.

Customer Service

No dealings with Canon to date, although Scottish stores report sever problems in the supply chain due to a new computer system.

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 28-135 IF Macro (bloody distortion).

Solid construction, metal lens mount, cheap price, lens is fast enough for landscape work.

Slow autofocus, zoom is not damped enough, and slides when pointed directly down at ground. Not optically great, 5.6 fstop is insufficient for lighted sports games.

After buying the rebel 2000 kit with 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 II lens, this lens was the next logical step for me. At $150 this is not a bad lens, but there is definite room for improvement. This lens is more solidly built than either my 28-80mm or my 50mm f1.8 II, and it is my only lens that has a metal lens mount. Overall the lens feels good to hold and zooms nicely. My only complaint is that if I point it downwards at the ground, oftentimes the lens will stretch to 300mm, the damping isn't sufficient in my mind. My next complaint is the autofocus. It is very, very quiet indeed, but unfortunately also very slow. This is fine for me, since I normally do landscapes, or tripod mounted work, but the few times I have done action (birds, stunt planes) I have immediately set this lens to manual focus. Other than that, I dont' have much to say. The f5.6 @ 300mm is slow, but I'd expect this more at 300mm than I would at 80mm on my other zoom. Optically this lens is no winner. Despite all of these disavantages, I would still buy this lens again to gain the 75-300mm focal range.

Customer Service

None on any of my canon equiptment.

Similar Products Used:

Canon EF 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 II Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II

Price, speed, sharpness.

Chromatic aberration, flare, jerky zoom motion.

Cheap and fairly cheerful; found it nice and fast to focus (significantly faster and quieter than the similar Sigma 100-300) and pictures nice and sharp. However, suffers from purple fringing (chromatic aberration) around bright objects on dark backgrounds and flare. Sometimes you can rescue the results in Photoshop, sometimes not. Lens hood is not included and costs an outrageous 16 pounds on top, for a piddling little piece of plastic. Zoom action is fine when moved in large increments, but fine manipulation of just a few mm results in it 'sticking' and jerking a lot. Canon's 28-105 feels entirely different. While the pictures I get from it are far superior to those I used to get with the Sigma, the Sigma had no problems whatsoever with flare so in one way this is a step backwards. Currently looking at moving up to a 100-400 IS as this lens is clearly less than ideal.

Customer Service

Jessops have always been fine with me and never have a problem returning faulty or less than suitable items.

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 100-300, Cosina 100-400.

Clear Lense and takes a beautiful photo. Cheap for the photographer on a budget.

Auto focus is a little slow and lense tends to slide out when pointed down in manual focus. Used with a tele converter do need to use manual focus.

I bought this lense secondhand as I am on a very tight budget and wanted to extend my focal range. As a beginner I am still learning the finer art of Photograhpy. This lense has been great the picture quality is great and my test subject has come up fantastic. As I shoot mainly animals the focal length is what I am after and this is a great.

Similar Products Used:

Canon 28-85 Canon 35-85