Canon Zoom Lens

MarkH

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Hi everyone, you guys helped me so much a couple of months ago I hope you can this time too.

I'm a beginner at photography and have a Canon 450D. I have been using my 450D with the standard kit 18-55mm lens but really want something that will give me some zoom. Now being a beginner and a student I'm on a tight budget. I spotted this lens TinyURL.com - shorten that long URL into a tiny URL the Canon EF-S 55-250mm

I have used a number of compacts in the past and camcorders ranging from 3x - 18x optical zoom so i can judge them but the 55-250mm I'm not sure how much zoom that actually will give me. Wondered if anyone could tell me ideally by what sort of equivalent (roughly of course) it is in optical zoom. Also is this a good lens for a beginner who's after that extra reach on a budget or do you guys have any other recommendations?

Many Thanks,
Mark
 
Please correct me if I am wrong guys! I think 50mm on a full frame body = 1X. You having a cropped sensor automatically gain 1.6x . With 250mm you then have 1.6x(250/50) = 8X. But really these maginification multiplication is really only for a point and shoot where you cant change the lens. It is just telling you how many times you can make it bigger if you start from the lens zoomed out. So theoratically your 55-250 will give you 4.5X (250/55).
 
That lens is decent at best. Save up for a bit until you can get better glass. That one will never give you sharpness and detail you expect. If you want a decent zoom, be prepared to spend 4-600 bucks otherwise it will not be alot better than your kit lens IMO ;)
 
I agree with Dan, I paid almost 700$ for the Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 and while the range is superb, the sharpness and image quality kind of fail at times.

look more into the 70-200mm or 70-300mm range.

..there are reasons within the physics of optics why they can make a telephoto zoom starting at 70mm-XXXmm and produce a sharper image than if they are starting at a lower focal length. I've read a lot about the limitations of that Tamron 18-270mm before but especially after I bought it and have come across language that I'd need a bit more than 2years of college physics to understand enough to try and teach it, so I wont try to. Any way, it accounts for why you see canon, nikon, and others starting their quality telephoto zooms at 70mm,85mmm,100mm, etc rather than dropping lower.

Canon 70-300mm IS USM
 
There is no direct comparison. For example.
100-400mm lens is a 4x lens.
50-200mm is also a 4x lens.
 
Hi,
Thanks guys, I shall hold off buying that lens then and try and save up a little more. I was going mainly by the good reviews on Amazon and some sample shots that were put on there.

Cheers again,
Mark
 
The 55-250 is a decent lens. Its an entry level lens, so its not as sharp, not built as nice, and if you enjoy shooting telephoto, it will be one you quickly replace.

But it serves its purpose well.

Personally, I skipped over the 55-250 and went with the 70-300 IS for a trip to Australia. The lens was great, sharp, good to use. However, when I got back, I upgraded to the 70-200 2.8 IS.

So it really depends on what you need and how much further you want to push your photography. Buddy of mine shoots with a T1i and bought the 55-250 and loves it. He wouldnt upgrade, not worth the money as he isn't taking his photography further than family and fun shots
 
Just in case you didnt know, EF-S will only fit cropped sensor canon like our cameras. If you ever upgrade it to a full sensor, you cant use the lens. I was not sure what your plan is in the future.
 
@bigtwinky Thank you for the advice, im having a look at the 70-300 IS now. At the moment I am not jumping all the way into photography so to speak. I will look at doing this after uni and getting a full time job which can pay for it ;) I mainly wanted something so that when I go out and about, I usually look at landscapes and buildings, I wanted something that would let me go that little further in. The 70-200 is way to far out of my price range at the moment. Thanks for your suggestions!

@Schwettylens I didn't know that no, however I don't plan on upgrading my camera for a long time yet and as I don't know if I can fully sustain this hobby the idea of upgrading the camera hasn't come to mind. But thanks for the tip I shall keep it in mind!

Mark
 
@bigtwinky Thank you for the advice, im having a look at the 70-300 IS now. At the moment I am not jumping all the way into photography so to speak. I will look at doing this after uni and getting a full time job which can pay for it ;) I mainly wanted something so that when I go out and about, I usually look at landscapes and buildings, I wanted something that would let me go that little further in. The 70-200 is way to far out of my price range at the moment. Thanks for your suggestions!

If your hands are not too shaky (mine are) and you can live without IS, have a look at the Canon 70-200 f/4 without IS. Its the same price as the 70-300 4-5.6 IS.

The difference? You loose 100mm on the long end, you lose the IS, but you now have a constant aperture of f/4, so when at 150mm+, you are still at f/4 instead of f/5.6.

You also have L glass, their pro glass. While the 70-300 is sharp, it is still not L glass sharp.
 
Having both the EF-S 55-250 IS and the EF 70-300 IS USM, I can say yes, the 70-300 is slightly sharper, has a better AF, but for closeup work, I use the 55-350 a LOT. And I can argue with it lacking sharpness. Is it L-glass quality? Of course not. But it's not bad by any means:

lizard2.jpg

LizardClosers.jpg
 
There was a brand-new 70-300mm f/4~5.6 L-series lens announced just last week. It might have very high image quality, befitting the L-series name. The sensors of compact digivams are exceptionally tiny, compared with the sensor sizes in a d-slr, so the lens's magnification factor for d-slr use is much less important.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top