'Going Cheap on Lenses' Do They Really Make All the Difference?

jvw2941 · Oct 21, 2009

I asked my friend which lens he preferred out of two Canon EF lenses and he replied "Don't go cheap on lenses, they make all the difference." I put this into consideration and I'm sure I don't want to have to buy another lens of the same category after another, but I also don't want to blow all my money on some expensive lens that could give me the same result as another. The two lenses are linked below and I would love to have some feedback from some of the more professional side of this forum. Or anyone who would like to give an honest opinion.

EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_169625_-1

EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_180640_-1

Thanks so much!

-JVW

ErectedGryphon · Oct 21, 2009

OMG! What have you done! People are about to start yelling about quality glass up in here!

Most will probably say, buy the best you can get, and then upgrade the body later. Since your talking Canon, you should consider getting something in the "L" series line up. But, if you don't think you'll ever get that serious, then stick with what will work for you and makes you happy.

I have used the "EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III" and got acceptable results, but as soon as I could afford it I upgraded to "L".

The "EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS", is relatively new, I haven't seen them, but with IS, you will find you can hand hold more than you could with the other one. Provided your not using it on a full frame like the 5D.

Garbz · Oct 22, 2009

Exactly what is said above!

I am the first to complain how crap my 18-200mm experience was, but I would also be the first to recommend it to someone who buys a DSLR for a decent camera and not because they are going to take up photography as a hobby and will ever buy more than one lens.

If you're semi serious about your hobby, the glass matters. If you don't want to sink more than $3000 in your camera gear for a few years, then no it doesn't. Just don't expect the shiny results you see from people with waaaaaay too much spare mulah

blash · Oct 22, 2009

To make a car analogy, getting an old body is like getting the frame of an old clunker and getting a new expensive body is like getting the frame of a Ferrari. Neither of them really matters though, because what really matters is the engine (the lens you use). Put a crappy engine in a clunker or a Ferrari, and they'll both perform like crap. Put a great engine in both cars and they'll both do really well. The Ferrari will have a slight advantage, it's all aerodynamic and it's got the awesome tires, the handling will be better, the seats comfier, but the clunker will keep up almost as well. It's much better to spend your money on the engine (the glass) than on the (camera) body.

robertwsimpson · Oct 22, 2009

I have the 55-250 and it's a great lens. As long as you're shooting in broad daylight and 250 is a far enough reach... right now, I have a wide angle zoom, a telephoto zoom, and a 50mm prime, so I can accomplish just about any shot relatively well. The first lens I plan on upgrading to L series material is my wide angle zoom. I don't know if that helps, I guess what I'm trying to say is that you should get something that will hold you until you're ready to drop the big bucks on a nice lens. Plus, you'll know more about what you want once you have shot for a while in different situations. Also, search online for lens rental places. You can borrow a lens for a week for pretty cheap and then figure out what you want.

newrmdmike · Oct 22, 2009

glass matters. . . but you can almost always get by. . . so unless your spoiled and know better it won't be a problem just now. eventually you'll see the flaws and perhaps want something else.

another big thing for me lately is considering whether the images are going to print, or online, because online most pics are small small small, meaning most of the flaws are minimized, and sharpening can be done to give it a more than decent appearance for web.

LuckySo-n-So · Oct 22, 2009

Get the best glass that you can afford. Manufacturer glass is always better than third party in MOST cases. If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. I know someone on this site who would say to wait until you can afford the BEST glass, but I also know that sometimes you can't afford to wait, and must go a step lower.

I've been wanting the Mother of All Lenses(for Nikon, at least)--the Nikon 70-200 2.8 vr, but at $1800-2300, the cost is waaaaaay too prohibitive. Usually, when I'm right at, say, $1200 saved for such a lens, I'll need new tires, or something breaks on the car, I'll have to go to the doctor or something. After saving for 4 months, I had enough to buy the Sigma 70-200 (which has great reviews), so I bought it and I have not been disappointed. It is a wonderful lens. When/if I start to make money off of my photography, I'll buy pro glass. but until then, I'll get the best I can afford.

Dao · Oct 22, 2009

OP, out of the 2 lenses you listed, I will choose the EF-S 55-250mm IS one.

I do not like the plastic mount of that lens, but according to what I read and saw, it is pretty decent optically for the price.

Antithesis · Oct 22, 2009

I'd choose the 55-250 IS as well. I'd definitely give up a little reach to be able to handhold at a little slower shutter speeds.

Also, there are some random cheapo lenses that are actually really sharp. You can also go with "prime" lenses, which are a good bridge between consumer lenses and the sharpness of professional grade lenses. They also tend to be much, much faster, allowing you to gather more light and also play with DOF.