Sub $300 Telephoto

I am starting to lean towards the Sigma, I can get it for $300 here with taxes, but the Canon is $400, which is out of my budget considering I am just a high school student. Somebody offered me a Tamron 55-200mm for $150, but I am not sure if this lens would suit me. Any input?

Save up for a 70-200L f/4 non-IS, it will usually be far better than other telezooms in this price range.

If you go with a refurb, you're only $229 away from your $300 pricepoint (and yes, its worth the difference).

The only problem is the lack of IS...so make sure you have lots of light (or a tripod) when you go shooting.

nw85887 wrote in post #7010320
Save up for a 70-200L f/4 non-IS, it will usually be far better than other telezooms in this price range.

If you go with a refurb, you're only $229 away from your $300 pricepoint (and yes, its worth the difference).

The only problem is the lack of IS...so make sure you have lots of light (or a tripod) when you go shooting.

Good advice, BUT... While you are saving up for a Canon 70-200 f/4 L, why not buy a used Canon 70-210mm f/3.5-4.5 USM or a used Canon 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM.

When you are ready for the 70-200 L, you can probably sell the cheaper lens for the same amount you bought it for.

msowsun wrote in post #7010570
Good advice, BUT... While you are saving up for a Canon 70-200 f/4 L, why not buy a used Canon 70-210mm f/3.5-4.5 USM or a used Canon 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM.

When you are ready for the 70-200 L, you can probably sell the cheaper lens for the same amount you bought it for.

So you can avoid the hassle of trying to sell the cheaper lenses.

I'm just a fan of saving up and getting the lens I want the first time around.

I don't consider buying and selling used lenses a hassle. It is sort of like a hobby within a hobby. Buying and selling on Craigslist always works well for me, and I have bought a few on ebay as well.

If it takes a year or more to save the money, it is a year you could be shooting with a cheaper lens and gaining experience.

msowsun wrote in post #7010987
...If it takes a year or more to save the money, it is a year you could be shooting with a cheaper lens and gaining experience.

True, I was hoping he'd sell blood or mow lawns for the quick cash.

I already do a medium sized daily paper route, the used lens route is starting to seem more attractive, what should I look for in a used one? Are buying used lenses online(from this site or ebay) sensible?

photocrazy12 wrote in post #7006436
Ah, was going to recommend the same thing. Find a used Canon 70-210 f/4 or f/3.5-4.5 off of ebay. It goes for around 70-90£ around here.

Do not buy the f4, its kit quality craptastic.
The 3.5-4.5 is an awesome lens for the money. Faster than all the f3.5-5.6 alternatives, good image quality, very fast and super quite ring type USM with full time manual over ride.

KarlosDaJackal wrote in post #7008084
Optically there is not much difference between the Canon 55-250 and Sigma's 70-300 APO (forget about the non-APO version its horrible)

Features you loose with the Sigma = IS and 15mm on the short side
Features you gain with the Sigma = Full Frame compatible, 1:2 Macro mode, included reversible hood, 50mm on the long side.

The Sigma is fairly well regarded. Photozone have a pretty honest review of it here >> http://www.photozone.d​e …macro-test-report--review

Bearing in mind they say it is weak at 300mm, this is a 300mm shot, shutter speed was too low for most people, including me, so it could be even sharper, if the 1/FL rule was obeyed by me. Even the bokeh looks decent.

from what i've seen there appears to be a big difference in image quality of the two lenses

go with the 55-250IS...used if you plan on upgrading further down the road

also the review for the 55-250IS on photozone as well:
http://www.photozone.d​e …st-report--review?start=2

for comparison the sigma 70-300 recieved 2 stars across the categories of 'optical quality', 'mechanical quality', and 'price/performance'

the canon received 3,3, and 5

Headcase650 wrote in post #7012479
Do not buy the f4, its kit quality craptastic.
The 3.5-4.5 is an awesome lens for the money. Faster than all the f3.5-5.6 alternatives, good image quality, very fast and super quite ring type USM with full time manual over ride.

++

I own both (As well as the f4L) and the 70-210 f4 isn't worth the raw materials its made with. AFD, looks almost like soft-focus wide open, soft stopped down to f5.6, finally acceptable at f8. Avoid! The 70-210 USM is great, and it may even make moving to the L a little underwhelming. Hard to believe Canon once made decent consumer FF telephotos.

It is so easy to buy and sell on this forum that I wouldn't hesitate to buy the 55-250 IS and use it until you upgrade.

i got my canon 28 - 135 for $400 .

and its takes crispy photos

k4show wrote in post #7002532
I am not sure if I would like to go with an EF-S, because I could end up buying a 5dmkII, in the distant future

If you are going to drop the cash on a 5DmkII "in the distant future" you should expect to get lenses equal to that camera and $300 simply will not do it!

Get the 55-250mm; use it until you (or if you) get the full framer and then sell it and buy some L glass to go along with the 5d MkII.

In typical fashion this forum is pushing a member to spend more than he set out to. He said $300....so no L's.... and lets face it 200mm is harldy 'tele'....

Neilyb wrote in post #7014536
In typical fashion this forum is pushing a member to spend more than he set out to. He said $300....so no L's.... and lets face it 200mm is harldy 'tele'....

I figure if he's already "almost" there....then go for the gusto.

Yeah, this forum has defintely put a dent in my wallet....ah, I remember the days I was content with just my XTi & Tammy 17-35.