I have been painstakingly researching, trying to find a long lens, and I have not had much luck making a decision.
For a while I was set on the 70-300 IS USM, but have seen a complete lack of support for that lens. It seems to me that no other lens is as completely ignored.
Taking this lack of community support, I thought going with the 70-200L might be a fair choice. The lens is in within a similar price range, and seems to have users pouring out love for it. In the end I really think that a long lens with no IS would be a bad choice for me personally. I have very unsteady hands, and have to use every trick I can to steady myself enough to do well with 1/focal length (x1.6 since I have a crop) shutter. This bumps me up to the 70-200L IS, which is twice the price.
At that price point it really seems to me that I haven't put the time in to deserve that kind of lens. I'm relatively new to DSLR's, and to me it really seems like learner lenses are the way to go. I made my way up through the PnS category, and only plunked down for a Rebel when I was sure I knew what limitations I was trying to step past. Which brings me full circle to wonder if I should just stay with the starter 55-250.
Basically what I am looking for is advice on the two lower end models. I just really cant justify $1200 for a lens at the moment, but wonder if the initial step up is worth considering. Again though, I have to wonder why the community seems to avoid this lens as a whole.
Any advice would be gladly accepted.