Typical What Should I Buy Thread .... Canon zoom lens

Ritzy · Mar 13, 2013

I hate to ask questions like this but I'm new and don't like to waste my money on cheap products that don't have good quality photos.

So with that being said. I'm looking into getting a new lens that is around 55-250 or 300mm. Was looking at the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS lens but not sure if its crap and I should stay away or if its worth the pickup. Currently priced at $279. I'm willing to spend $500 on something. Not overly confident in buying on E-Bay for a lens. Mostly interested in shooting stuff outdoors ... animals, family playing sports. Any advice would be great.

Currently have a Canon T3
50mm F1.8
18-55 Kit lens

Big Mike · Mar 13, 2013

When it comes to telephoto lenses (or more lenses really), anything under $500 is probably in the 'cheap products' category. If you want something more 'high quality, look at the 70-200mm lenses from Canon (or Sigma/Tamron). If you want something with more reach, you might consider something in the 70-300mm range. There are many different models to choose from, but most of them are also in the 'cheap' category. There are some better ones, for example, the Canon 70-300mm IS USM, but it's a $650 lens. Also, they all tend to have a maximum aperture of F4-5.6, which can be a problem if you're shooting in lower light situations.

There is the Canon 100-400mm L IS. It's a big beast of a lens and it costs well over $1000, but the quality is outstanding. Then there are prime (non zoom) telephoto lenses; 200mm, 300mm, 400mm, 500mm and 600mm. A few different options/models to choose from....but they have really great image quality...and a really high price tag. For example, the Canon 400mm F2.8 L IS is a great lens with outstanding quality...but it will cost you just under $12,000.

I'm sure that is not what you were thinking about...but I'm just trying to show you that the 55-250mm at $279, really is closer to the bottom of the list, both in terms of price and quality. That's not to say that it might not be the right choice for you...but if you want to invest in a quality lens, that will last you for a long time...you will likely have to increase your budget.

Ritzy · Mar 13, 2013

Thanks Mike. Increasing the budget will most likley me the option I will take. I was looking at the Canon 70-300mm IS USM you had mentioned and I found a new one for $399 plus taxes. The reviews on the site are that its a very poor lens and that it gives grainy photos, any idea if this is true or does this lens still give some decent photos?

Edit: Then again reading the reviews that are posted on that site you linked it seems like this might not be that bad of a lens for someone just starting out like me that isn't ready to drop $2000 on a 70-200 just yet

Big Mike · Mar 13, 2013

I've never really heard of a lens giving 'grainy' photos, that is more like a camera issue.

Up until recently, the 70-300mm IS, was their best 70-300mm (I think they have 5 or 6 different models)...but it was around $700, when you can get a cheaper one for $150. Hard to justify, so it's not a great seller, which is probably why the price has come down.

They now have an 'L' version, which is supposed to be much better (and cost $1500 or something like that). I've heard mixed reviews.

You might also look at something like the Tamron 70-300mm with VC. Probably similar to the Canon IS, but a bit cheaper.

As for the 70-200mm option, they are much higher quality lenses, but yes, more expensive. I think the 'lowest' model is the 70-200mm F4 (without IS)...and it's only $700. A pretty good deal for the high quality that you get....but if you are going to spend that much....it's worth considering the upgrade to the IS version, or the F2.8 version....or the F2.8 IS version. :roll:

You might also check out Sigma or Tamron for their options in the 70-200mm range.

Fuganater · Mar 13, 2013

I have the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 and it takes awesome photos, even for a noobie like me. Now the Canon version is much better but if your just starting out, less than $800 isn't too bad.

TCampbell · Mar 13, 2013

"Cheap" is a relative term. Anything cheaper than *my* budget can afford is "cheap" and anything beyond what *my* budget can afford is not cheap.

Any lenses that Canon sells in the "L" series (e.g. the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II for example) is definitely not in the "cheap" category.

The 75-300mm lens is ... not so great. I have never recommended this lens.
The 55-250mm is slightly better, but still in the entry-priced low-end category. I recommend this lens only to someone who is on a limited budget and promises me that they wont try to create enlarged versions of the image... web-sizes only. Also... no sports or action photography. I had this lens once... I gave my copy away. I just couldn't feel right about 'selling' it. I never thought it was a great lens, but if you can accept it's many limitations, it's ok.
The 70-300mm USM is a better mid-range lens -- a little more expensive and a little (but not a lot) better in image quality.
The 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM is amazingly good... and also about $1500. But no question... it's definitely the best of the lot. While this is optically a high-performing lens and it's USM motor is responsive, it's still an f/3.5-5.6 variable focal ratio zoom, which means it's not suitable for low-light action photography (indoor sports or outdoor night sports under artificial field lighting.)

There are also FOUR different EF 70-200mm lenses... there's an f/4L both with and without IS as well as an f/2.8L both with and without IS and these are amazing lenses as well... but not cheap. The EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM is on "sale" right now for the low price of only $2129... you can take one home today.

TimGreyPhotography · Mar 14, 2013

The Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS is a very sharp lens with an amazing IS and I have seem them for $900 in great condition.

Ritzy · Mar 14, 2013

Well money is gonna stay in the bank for another month and then I'll have about double to spend on the lens and get something better than I can get right now.

trojancast · Mar 14, 2013

ritzy said:
I hate to ask questions like this but I'm new and don't like to waste my money on cheap products that don't have good quality photos.

So with that being said. I'm looking into getting a new lens that is around 55-250 or 300mm. Was looking at the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS lens but not sure if its crap and I should stay away or if its worth the pickup. Currently priced at $279. I'm willing to spend $500 on something. Not overly confident in buying on E-Bay for a lens. Mostly interested in shooting stuff outdoors ... animals, family playing sports. Any advice would be great.

Currently have a Canon T3
50mm F1.8
18-55 Kit lens

I think you will be very happy with the 55-250. It was designed for the rebel line and will complement your 18-55. I have used both extensively and find them to be much better than most kit lenses. Very good for the price. Get it and go out and shoot.

Juga · Mar 15, 2013

Everyone else is answering your questions with great detail but I wanted to throw in that I have purchased a lens off Ebay and had a great experience. The key is to finding someone with HIGH positive feedback. Ask any questions before bidding and READ everything on the page in great detail but I wouldn't completely discount the possibility of using ebay because I got a GREAT deal on my 50mm f/1.8 II.

tripography · Mar 15, 2013

The canon 70-300mm lens is good lens, atleast for the reviews that i have gone through. Canon manufactured lens with this price range cannot give grainy photos....If you can increase your budget a bit then go for this instead of the 55-250mm.

Chann · Mar 15, 2013

I went with the Tamron 70-300 VC USD. It is comparable to the Canon 70-300 IS USM. I paid $450 at my local camera store. The Canon sells for $650.

The Tamron has a very nice VC (vibration compensation).

It has full time manual focus ring where on the Canon you must switch a toggle from Auto to Manual. So far the image quality is great.

I think the Canon beats it in autofocus speed and accuracy. Also the Tamron gets slightly soft at 300 but is sharp at 200.

It is a big step up from the low end canon lens your considering and stays within budget.

raaskohx10 · Mar 15, 2013

I have a 55-250 mm IS-II lens which I use with 550D body. Initially I liked it but now I feel it is not that much sharp as I was expecting it. I'd suggest any "L" series lens would be great for medium zoom.

groundloop · Mar 16, 2013

ritzy said:
I hate to ask questions like this but I'm new and don't like to waste my money on cheap products that don't have good quality photos.

So with that being said. I'm looking into getting a new lens that is around 55-250 or 300mm. Was looking at the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS lens but not sure if its crap and I should stay away or if its worth the pickup. Currently priced at $279. I'm willing to spend $500 on something. Not overly confident in buying on E-Bay for a lens. Mostly interested in shooting stuff outdoors ... animals, family playing sports. Any advice would be great.

Currently have a Canon T3
50mm F1.8
18-55 Kit lens

The 55-250 is a nice lens, especially for it's price. You can find one for around $175 or so on ebay, and as has been mentioned look for a seller with at least a 99 % positive rating. I've had a 55-250 for over a year and have taken many great photos with it, and even now that I've upgraded to a 70-200 f4L I'm keeping the 55-250 as a backup instead of selling it, mostly because I like it so well I just couldn't bring myself to part with it.

duhast · Mar 16, 2013

Well money is gonna stay in the bank for another month and then I'll have about double to spend on the lens and get something better than I can get right now.

Please tell me where this bank is. I have several Large that I'd like to double....