Canon Rebel -- Which Lens?

[DogGoneGood]

I just bought my Canon Rebel XS yesterday with the 18-55mm kit lens. I'm looking to get a longer lens for taking longer-range shots. Currently, my budget is REALLY low... $150-$200 max. I will definitely upgrade to great glass in a few months when I can afford it financially.

Here's a few I found, but know absolutely nothing about the differences in them, or which one is better than the other. I want one that at least produces clear/sharp photos.

This is the one that I am really eyeing:

Amazon.com: Tamron AF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 LD for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo


Then there are these...

Amazon.com: Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo


Amazon.com: Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo


Those two look the exact same except the second one is $60 more and says it's "USM".

And lastly this one...


Amazon.com: Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo


Which is the same one sold at Walmart (where I got my Rebel) for $299.

Thoughts?

 

[DogGoneGood]

This one is a Sigma Macro Telephoto... is this one good?


Amazon.com: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro Telephoto Zoom Lens with Opteka 58mm UV Filter for Canon EOS SLR Cameras Including the 10D, 20D, 30D, 40D, 50D, Digital Rebel XT, XTi, XS, XSi, & T1i: Camera & Photo


I've been reading about the different abbreviations, but being new to a DSLR, I'm still a bit... lost.

 

[Big Mike]

Those two look the exact same except the second one is $60 more and says it's "USM".

Ultra Sonic Motor...it's a better focusing motor.

As far as I know, they are all fairly similar. They are consumer grade zoom lenses. They are OK in good light but not so much in lower light.

If you can spring for one with stabilization (IS for Canon, OS for Sigma, VC for Tamron), it would probably be worth it.

 

[Robin Usagani]

You can easily find 55-250mm IS on craigslist for around $180. I personally would choose this one over the 300mm without IS.

 

[DogGoneGood]

Thanks Mike. My purpose for this lens is going to be for using it on sunny days in bright light. Mainly for shooting actions shots of my dogs out on our property as they run around playing, shooting flying birds in the sky, ect. Fast moving objects, but it bright light.

 

[DogGoneGood]

You can easily find 55-250mm IS on craigslist for around $180. I personally would choose this one over the 300mm without IS.

Is IS only important in low light situations? Or is it something that's going to be needed in bright light situations such as action shots on a sunny day?

 

[DogGoneGood]

Another question... the second post with the Sigma MACRO Telephoto Lens... is there a benefit to having a telephoto lens with macro on it? Or is that just for being able to get closer to the subject when zoomed all the way out?

 

[Robin Usagani]

Canon is claiming that it will save you around 3 stops. So image that is taken at 1/20 with IS is as good as 1/80 without IS.

 

[DogGoneGood]

Canon is claiming that it will save you around 3 stops. So image that is taken at 1/20 with IS is as good as 1/80 without IS.

Ahhhh, that puts it in perspective for me, thanks. I may get a cheaper lens (like the Tamron) without IS since I'll be shooting in bright light, because in a few months, I will be definitely investing in better, more expensive glass for my camera.

A lot of my action shots I take on anywhere from 1/800 to 1/1200.

 

[Big Mike]

IS, is certainly nice to have, especially when you are walking around shooting hand held. It helps to fight blur from camera shake, which is really useful when shooting at long focal lengths like 200-300mm.

However, IS will not help to freeze blur from moving subjects. So it won't help to freeze your dogs or birds etc. Only a fast shutter speed will do that.

Another question... the second post with the Sigma MACRO Telephoto Lens... is there a benefit to having a telephoto lens with macro on it? Or is that just for being able to get closer to the subject when zoomed all the way out?

Many lenses use Macro as a sales catch phrase. I'm pretty sure that it can't get close enough to give you 1:1 reproduction, which is what many consider to be true Macro. If anything, that lens should allow you to focus closer than the non-macro version of that lens.

 

[DogGoneGood]

Canon is claiming that it will save you around 3 stops. So image that is taken at 1/20 with IS is as good as 1/80 without IS.

Meh... the reviews on the Tamron without IS are gfreat, but I'm seeing a lot of "but use a tripod!" comments.

I'll go with a lens that has IS in it. I'm not all that nuts about needing a tripod for action shots, lol.

 

[Robin Usagani]

oopss. i did my math wrong.. 1/20 vs 1/160.

 

[DogGoneGood]

IS, is certainly nice to have, especially when you are walking around shooting hand held. It helps to fight blur from camera shake, which is really useful when shooting at long focal lengths like 200-300mm.

However, IS will not help to freeze blur from moving subjects. So it won't help to freeze your dogs or birds etc. Only a fast shutter speed will do that.

Another question... the second post with the Sigma MACRO Telephoto Lens... is there a benefit to having a telephoto lens with macro on it? Or is that just for being able to get closer to the subject when zoomed all the way out?

Many lenses use Macro as a sales catch phrase. I'm pretty sure that it can't get close enough to give you 1:1 reproduction, which is what many consider to be true Macro. If anything, that lens should allow you to focus closer than the non-macro version of that lens.

Great, thanks Mike!

At this point after reading all of y'alls advice, I think I'll start with this lens:


Amazon.com: Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo


It has the image stabilization like recommended, however I don't see "AF" anywhere to know that it dsoes auto-focus. Reading other lenses, I found a few where the reviews say the lenses weren't compatible with auto-focus, and could only be manually focused.

 

[Robin Usagani]

not sure where you read that.. It is AF.

 

[DogGoneGood]

Not on this lens, on two other lenses I ran across on amazon, where complaints in the reviews said that those lenses were not compatible with auto-focus and could only be manually focused.

Remember, I'm new to lenses, so some of my questions are bound to be insanely stupid.