I guess what I really want to know... is the USM worth the extra money ? Is it a better lens that will serve me better than the cheaper 111 model. Thanks
2007-05-04 11:07:09 · 4 answers · asked by allen c 1 in Consumer Electronics ➔ Cameras
Actualy it's a roman numeral III (3) not 111.
But the differance between the EF III and the USM is the USM is a hair quicker on the AF (autofocus) and is absolutly queit. Even though the EF III you can just barely hear (a very light swish), the USM's you can't hear at all.
2007-05-04 11:23:51 · answer #1 · answered by clavestone 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The 111 uses a DC motor as AF drive actuator. With the USM, every EF lens contains its own custom-designed autofocus motor and microprocessor and so it's quieter.
2007-05-04 18:25:38 · answer #2 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know what your budget is, but are you aware of the Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus Lens? It costs $550, but it is very well-reviewed.
2007-05-05 00:40:28 · answer #3 · answered by Picture Taker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Canon 75-300mm lens III model was best enough, so long you could take best qualities of pictures,don't buy an expensive lens, trying to save money,lah.
2007-05-08 10:27:31 · answer #4 · answered by victor98_2001 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋