robert_thommes Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Does anyone have experience with BOTH of these lenses? I have used the 70-300 IS USM lens and have found it to be a fine lens. But I'm hearing some decent things about the newer Canon 55-250 IS lens, too. Since I seldom stretch longer than 250mm anyway, I was wondering how these lens compare particularly at the 250mm range. I'm considering a two lens combo of the 18-55 IS and the 55-250 IS but only if the 55-250 is as good or better than the 70-300. Thanks for you feedback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_hanlon3 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Review of 55-250 here: http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/194-canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f4-56-is-test-report--review Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donald_a Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Why isn't Canon going to market this lens here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmanthree Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Donald, Where is "here?" US? Is the 55-250 a crop sensor lens only? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopoldstotch Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 <p><i>"Is the 55-250 a crop sensor lens only?"</i></p> <p>yes, its an EF-S lens, so its crop body only (specifically crop bodies after the 300D). And if by "here" Donald was referring to North America, it is being marketed here. It will be available shortly, and Amazon is currently taking pre-orders for it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donald_a Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 I don't see the 55-250 on Amazon, but it's on the Canon USA website listed as being available in March. What is the price going to be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopoldstotch Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Its <a href=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0011NVMO8/thedigitalpic-20'>here</a>, and listed for $299. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donald_a Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Thanks. Apparently "canon 55-250" isn't enough information to find it using the Amazon search function. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amol Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Amazon lists it released on May 20th. Canon reports March. I wonder which it will be? So, the 55-250 is $300. And the 70-300 IS about $550. Seems like a tough decision. I would almost be tempted to shell out the extra $250, for a little more reach (300mm), of course losing the 55mm-70mm range. But mostly, I would buy the 70-300 because it would be compatible with a Full-Frame DSLR, if I ever buy one. Also, the review from Photozone mentions issues with focusing using a Rebel XT, since I currently own the XT, that is a bit discouraging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffm Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I think that this thing has the potential to kill sales of the 70-300 (and incidentally to do the same to the resale value of mine!) I really can't see many full-frame users wanting the 70-300 - they'll all be shooting L glass. Nor can I see that the average punter will pay close to double to get an extra 50mm reach. There just isn't enough difference between the two to justify the extra dollars. Now if the 70-300 had a proper ring USM (and all that goes with it, like better AF, FTM and non-rotating front) that might be a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amol Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Good point Geoff. I meant if FF ever become semi-affordable. Also, when traveling some people prefer not to have a huge white L lens around their neck, (I would be one of those paranoid people). But, I agree.I currently own the Tamron 17-50. If I upgrade my Rebel XT, it will probably be to a 40D (or another EF-S DSLR). Meaning the 55-250 would be a good investment, at least for several years. There may come a day that a FF DSLR will cost $1000. Maybe? Maybe not? I am faced with the same dilemma as the OP (choosing between the 55-250 and 70-300). Also, looking at the specs, the 55-250 offers 4 stops compensation, and the 70-300 offers 3 stops. Decisions-decisions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_thommes Posted February 5, 2008 Author Share Posted February 5, 2008 So if the XT has trouble with the new 55-250 lens, how would my 300D handle it? Since I have NO interest in any camera upgrade right now, this might make all the difference. That, and the fact that the 70-300IS has been a proven winner for me anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken munn Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I've tried the 55-250 instore. It took OK shots, but the build quality was pretty unappealing. Not much 'pride of ownership' in it. I chose to put up the extra for the 70-300 IS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwtphoto Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 It is listed at Henry's for 349.99 cdn and is listed as being in stock. They are also beginning to show up on ebay (hong kong). here is the link to henry's http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ItemsDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&departmentId=10404&categoryId=11802&itemID=225376 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_thommes Posted February 5, 2008 Author Share Posted February 5, 2008 Ken, Exactly the kind of feedback that I'm looking for. Thanks for your impression/opinion. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sloane_davis Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I don't want to sound stupid, but is a 300mm able to take shots farther away than a 200mm? I am looking for the best for the money telephoto lens for my children's' sporting events, beach, etc. I want thelens to be able to shoot from pretty far away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoff_foale Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Sloane. The stupid answer is, Yes. Very simply, it's like using a telescope on the end of your lens, but remember the more you increase zoom the smaller the scene that can be included. Lets try to put it another way, the children will get bigger but you won't be able to see so much of the surrounding area. So, a 300mm would be a lot better for your purpose than a 200mm, but 400mm might be even better. You need to work out just how big you need to go. Like many things in life, the more you spend the better the quality but the 70-300 IS is an excellent lens and good value for money if 300mm will be sufficient; if not think about a 100-400mm or a big prime lens. The downside of larger lenses is increased cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb2222 Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Geoff. Actualy the correct answer to Sloane's question is No, You can take pictures as far as your eye can see with both lenses. But a 300mm the subject will be larger and look closer then a 250mm would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidhay Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I have both the 70-300IS and the new 55-250IS. Having had the original 75-300IS, the 70-300DOIS and currently the 70-300IS, the 70-300IS is the best of the three (or is now, after the 'portrait fix'). I pair up the 55-250IS with the 18-5IS as lightweight travel lenses. They give an excellent range, 28-400 equivalent, with 4 stop IS, low weight and low cost. I have been very pleased with the performance of the 55-250 so far. I hadn't directly compared the two lenses before but when I saw your query I thought I would give it a try. I have just shot test targets with both at all focal lengths, at full aperture. They are awfully close, with the edge possibly just going to the 70-300. At half the price the 55-250 has to be the best buy. The 55-250 has a plastic lens mount but the manual focus action is quite good and the front of the lens at full extension is firm, with no wobble, unlike the 70-300 before the fix. The inside of the rear of the lens is made up of two nested tubes, both flock lined to reduce flare. It is a well constructed lens despite the low cost. If you want the best, the 70-300 is a safe bet, but don't write off the 55-250. It is a remarkable lens for the price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_thommes Posted February 5, 2008 Author Share Posted February 5, 2008 David, I think that your situation would be ideal---having a lighter weight lens duo for those occassions that warrent that. Unfortunately, my retirement income won't allow such luxuries. So I'll need to settle on just one of these tele zooms. Right now the scales are tipping towards the 70-300 IS; if only by a little bit. Again, I want to continue to thank all for your feedback to my concern. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sloane_davis Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Thanks for the answers. And what about the 70-300 that has the micro in it now? They say you are able to do both with this new lens. It is on Amazon for $169 and seems like a great buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe_s.2 Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I got this lens from Asia. I got it for USD257 equilvalent. But since then, some of my friends has gotten it for USD212 equilvalent. The IS is nice, and when compared to the 70-300, the f number is the same anyway, so its comparable. I would prefer something with a bigger f number though, for more available light indoors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooltpmd Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 I own the 70-300 IS ... it is a wonderful IS lens. Compared to the older IS on the 28-135 IS (which is good), I have an overwhelming increase in keepers. The colors are rich, the AF is quick & quiet. I would recommend this to anyone who wants a Telephoto. Downside: battery life. IS does require some battery. Now to the EF-S 55-250, which can be gotten on EBAY for too much. It is a kit level lens with Zoom. Like the 18-55 IS, it is getting better reviews than the non-IS versions. But, it is Canons way of giving the cheaper Digital Rebel crowd (like me) a cheap, servicable lens. Currently, EBAY stores are charging $50-$100 more than the projected price and adding $60 for shipping (a deal if you are shipping a 2 ton automobile). <b>My take:</b> there is no comparison. 70-300 is better glass, better IS, more focal length, better build at $600. The 55-250 is adequate and for $200-250 (the liklely price) is a convincing rival for the frugal, but at $400 ... I wouldn't waste the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sloane_davis Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 What is the difference between the IS and not having the IS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoff_foale Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 I'll try to give a simple answer, Sloane but expect to be corrected. The Image Stabilisation locks onto your subject and compensates for your shaky hand. I think of it as working like a gyroscope. Hand holding a long heavy lens is difficult, as I'm sure you are aware, and with a long lens any shake is magnified on the photo. Higher shutter speeds overcome this shake but it can ruin your photos at slower speeds, say below 1/300 for a 300mm lens. In my opinion, Canon IS works very well and I wouldn't buy a lens for handholding without it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now