Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 25 Mar 2011 (Friday) 21:36
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 55-250 or 70-300?

 
ontonagondave
Senior Member
Avatar
670 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 120
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Kenny Lake, Alaska
     
Mar 25, 2011 21:36 |  #1

Both IS and the 300 is not an L glass. Looking for the best image quality to take mainly wildlife up here in Alaska. I know there is a price difference but the main concern is IQ. Using a T2i.
Thanks,
Dave




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
xarqi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,435 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Aotearoa/New Zealand
     
Mar 25, 2011 21:39 |  #2

Get the 55-250 unless you can afford the 100-400.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tagakweens
Goldmember
1,027 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: North Jersey
     
Mar 25, 2011 21:41 |  #3

for the value, you can't go wrong with the 55-250... you can find one here for $160-190




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kevinmcdade
Senior Member
603 posts
Joined Jan 2008
Location: McKinney, TX
     
Mar 25, 2011 21:41 as a reply to  @ xarqi's post |  #4

One to consider is the Tamron SP AF70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC Ultra Silent Drive (USD) (external link). It gets great reviews.


-KMc-
Canon 7D | Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS | Sigma 10-20 | Canon 70-200L f/4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,375 posts
Gallery: 48 photos
Likes: 3210
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Mar 25, 2011 23:14 |  #5

i'd look at a sigma 150-500mm if you can afford it...if not..get the 55-250mm...but you'll be pretty short for wildlife


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jabba22
Member
38 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
Mar 25, 2011 23:46 |  #6

I'd agree with the consensus of the 55-250 over the 70-300mm.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ceegee
Goldmember
2,320 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Montreal, Quebec
     
Mar 26, 2011 00:22 |  #7

I owned both, and IMHO the 55-250 is by far the better choice. IQ is similar (I can't distinguish which of my photos were taken with which lens), focusing speed is similar (fairly slow in both cases - the 70-300 doesn't have "true" USM), and I actually preferred the IS system on the 55-250. Given that the 70-300 is more than twice the price, it seems like a fairly easy choice. The 55-250 is a terrific lens for the cost - you're unlikely to be disappointed.


Gear: Canon 7D, Tokina 12-24 f/4, Canon 24-105L f4, Canon 70-300L, Canon 60 macro f/2.8, Speedlite 580 EXII, 2x AB800

Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Mar 26, 2011 01:28 |  #8

Go with the new Tamron 70-300mm for the extra reach for wildlife . You may have to manual focus , but the Tamron will take a tc and the 55-250 won't.


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ontonagondave
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
670 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 120
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Kenny Lake, Alaska
     
Mar 26, 2011 02:21 as a reply to  @ CountryBoy's post |  #9

Thanks everyone for the excellent advice. Ruled out the Canon 70-300 but am now studying the Tamron.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Mar 26, 2011 05:29 |  #10

jabba22 wrote in post #12094713 (external link)
I'd agree with the consensus of the 55-250 over the 70-300mm.

right, it's a no-brainer to choose the 55-250IS at $150 - $185. http://www.adorama.com​/CA55250AFSR.html (external link)

But for wildlife in Alaska you will want 400mm - and that gets much more expensive !




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
argyle
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,187 posts
Likes: 20
Joined Apr 2007
Location: DFW, Texas
     
Mar 26, 2011 05:38 |  #11

watt100 wrote in post #12095731 (external link)
right, it's a no-brainer to choose the 55-250IS at $150 - $185. http://www.adorama.com​/CA55250AFSR.html (external link)

But for wildlife in Alaska you will want 400mm - and that gets much more expensive !

250mm on a crop body will be equivalent to the FOV of 400mm on a FF. Of course, shooting at the extreme focal length of a 5:1 consumer zoom is usually not the best in terms of IQ...


"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son". - Dean Wormer

GEAR LIST

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Mar 26, 2011 05:53 |  #12

argyle wrote in post #12095744 (external link)
Of course, shooting at the extreme focal length of a 5:1 consumer zoom is usually not the best in terms of IQ...

OF course, but sometimes those cheap 'consumer' lens can do pretty good at the extreme focal length!


XSi (450D) with Canon 55-250IS
at the extreme focal length of 250mm

- cropped!

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4122/4939473184_657d255649_z.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KVN ­ Photo
Goldmember
Avatar
1,940 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
     
Mar 26, 2011 08:03 |  #13

+1 on the 55-250.


X-Pro1 + 18-55 f/2.8-4 OIS + 55-200 f/3.8-4.5 OIS
TS-E 24 f/3.5L II + XF 35 f/1.4 + XF 56 f/1.2
Sony RX100 II + G12
Travel the world!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mastertech01
Goldmember
Avatar
2,098 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2007
Location: LAWTON OKLAHOMA USA
     
Mar 26, 2011 08:07 |  #14

I just sold my 55-250, like my 70-300IS much better. Try them both before you decide. I had the Tamron for a few days... Got more soft images than I ever got with the Canon lenses.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KVN ­ Photo
Goldmember
Avatar
1,940 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
     
Mar 26, 2011 08:36 |  #15

What about a used 400 f/5.6L USM, it has a great optic, and will be long enough on your camera body.
Since you could get 70-300 which is about $700, I thought you may want to consider it.


X-Pro1 + 18-55 f/2.8-4 OIS + 55-200 f/3.8-4.5 OIS
TS-E 24 f/3.5L II + XF 35 f/1.4 + XF 56 f/1.2
Sony RX100 II + G12
Travel the world!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,591 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 55-250 or 70-300?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is DamianG
703 guests, 250 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.