Canon EF 75-300mm F/4.0-5.6 III Lens

Pros:
Telephoto range
4x zoom ratio
Lightweight
Cost

Cons:
Very slow focus
Hard bokeh (depth of field blur)
Rotating front element
Minimum focus distance

This is the least expensive telephoto zoom that Canon makes. For an entry-level telephoto lens it’s not bad, but you may want to consider the other lenses that Canon offers in this focal length range: (street price for new lenses)
EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III - $150.00
EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III USM - $180.00
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM - $ 550.00
EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM - $ 1,100.00
The main problem with this lens is the very slow focus system. If you’re used to a DC focus motor on a smaller lens, you will still notice how slow this lens focuses comparatively. If you’re used to an Ultrasonic Motor, this lens is probably not for you. This somewhat limits this lens’s ability to be used in action situations, but for wildlife you probably won’t mind. If you have the aperture stopped down, the background blur (bokeh) is unappealing. The long focal length inherently has a lot of shake, so this lens needs good lighting to keep shutter speeds up, Image Stabilization would of course help. The good news is that the USM version (with the same optics) is only $30 more, well worth it in my mind. If you are serous about using this for sports or low light conditions , you should really consider the 70-300mm IS USM. If you have some serious cash to invest, the Diffractive Optics version is a pro-grade lens.

Bottom line: Yes, it’s the most affordable, but a novice shooter will outgrow its features quickly. There is very little reason not to get the USM version instead, and the only downside to the IS version is cost.

PROS
1. Cost (can normally be purchased for under $200)
2. Zoom Range
3. Lightweight

CONS
1. Slow To Focus (as compared to USM)
2. Front Element Rotates

While not the greatest this lens is capable of produces really good photos. This is Canon's lowest priced lens in this zoom range, so expect to give up some of the luxuries with it. My biggest complaint is that is is slow to focus, but then again I normal have one of Canon's USM lenses on my camera (the 28-135mm IS).

When used outside in good light this lens works very well. However, when used inside, or in low light, the images aren't as sharp and clear, due to lens shake (this is where the IS version has the advantage, or if used with a tripod). As long as you are using a faster shutter speed the photos taken with this lens will be fine. If you are going to be using it to shoot birds or wildlife with then this lens isn't a bad choice, and the price can't be beat, but don't plan on using it for shooting portraits.

For the difference in the price I would look at the USM version, though, due to the faster focus. And, if your budget supports it I would recommend the IS version of this lens, as I am sure that would greatly enhanced the photos (as it will compensate for lens shake), especially if you are going to be using it in any low light situations.

I personally do not use this focal length that often, and when I do I use it outside when it is well lighted, so the other features aren't that important to me. Although I wish I had spent the extra and gotten at least the USM version. I can say that if I used it more often then I do now (I have had this lens for about 4 months now, and think I have only used it twice) I would get the IS version.

This lens is a great choice for your moderately experienced photographer. This lens body does NOT have the IS feature and requires a steady hand (or use of a tripod). Also requires some know how of proper camera settings because the focal length of the lens is greater than the square law of the flash. You can open your aperture, but, this also adds the risk of even more blur and loss of fine details. Great for outdoor use, not perfect inside, but I'm still in love. =)

This is a great lens. 75-300 telephoto (for APC Digital cameras that is 110-450mm) is very usable. You can do portraits, as well close up shoots o Your kids soccer game. However this is not a expensive L type, no limits in design lens. It does not have Image Stabolized system, making even simple focusing difficult. It's optical glass is not great quality, living some pictures soft on the edges. It is also relatively dark at 300mm 5.6. It also uses cheapest version of Ultrasonic Motor, mostly loud and not as fast. Front element will rotate, so use of Circular Polarize is at least difficult. With little know how, most photographers can achieve fantastic pictures. Use of tripod, switching to manual focus does the trick in most cases. Comparing to Sigma or Tamron offerings at similar price, Canon EF 75-300mm is still better choice. At least You do not have to be worry about Your lens being compatible with new cameras, which happen to be the case with off brand lenses. I owned three versions of this lens. I was never dissatisfy with it's performance. For it's price and abilities, i found Canon EF 75-300mm 4-5.6 to be very useful. Well worth it's list price of $239.99 US.That is why i got this lens for myself. If You can afford upgrade, EF 70-300 4-5.6 IS, listed at $649.99 US is a great option.

The EF 75-300mm telephoto lens by Canon has great optical lens / quality - even the mount is metal. However, the AF (autofocus) motor on this non-USM/IS badboy makes it horrendous/not usable in AF mode. I use it MF mode and love the quality, DOP (depth of field) and even its construction. For the low price, why not?