Tamron 70-300 or Canon 70-300mm

I'm currently looking at the two and leaning towards the Tamron since it's slightly cheaper but between the two, which one would be a better choice. I have read all sorts of mixed reviews about the two. Anyone have both of them to compare. Some say the Tamron is slow but some say it's fast. Some say the Canon produces sharper images in the mid to high range.
Too many reviews to get a good idea which one is better for the price. Canon is $500 on amazon and $400 for Tamron version. Is the Tamron durable, won't break easily.

RHChan84 wrote in post #12443358
I'm currently looking at the two and leaning towards the Tamron since it's slightly cheaper but between the two, which one would be a better choice. I have read all sorts of mixed reviews about the two. Anyone have both of them to compare. Some say the Tamron is slow but some say it's fast. Some say the Canon produces sharper images in the mid to high range.
Too many reviews to get a good idea which one is better for the price. Canon is $500 on amazon and $400 for Tamron version. Is the Tamron durable, won't break easily.

Tamron is definitely durable and pretty fast. IQ is good too. Can't compare with the Canon lens as I've never used it.

Or would it even be worth it since I have the 55-250mm. I will be selling it if I do plan to go with the 70-300mm. I just want more of a Zoom.

RHChan84 wrote in post #12443467
Or would it even be worth it since I have the 55-250mm. I will be selling it if I do plan to go with the 70-300mm. I just want more of a Zoom.

250mm versus 300mm is noticeable, but not by a great deal. Chances are if you find that 250mm isn't enough then you'll think the same of 300mm.

I think you should consider other options.

RHChan84 wrote in post #12443467
Or would it even be worth it since I have the 55-250mm. I will be selling it if I do plan to go with the 70-300mm. I just want more of a Zoom.

if reach is the only thing you want 250mm vs 300mm is not that much of a difference. Look into 400mm f/5.6 or 100-400mm lenses. I've upgraded from 55-250mm and pretty happy with my choice.

My budget is tight and im interested in the 70-300mm. Ill look into the 100-400mm tomorrow morning. my budget is around $500.

I recommend trying the Tamron. I did, but it wasn't for me. It was too slow at 300mm when stopped down to get better IQ(F8-F11) and the VC seemed to jump around a lot compared to Canon's system.

I like canon's IS and hasn't disappointed me yet.

And if I do pick up a 70-300mm, I will sell the 55-250mm. I think for me, a 18-135, 70-300mm and 50mm is enough for me and my travels.

RHChan84 wrote in post #12443834
My budget is tight and im interested in the 70-300mm. Ill look into the 100-400mm tomorrow morning. my budget is around $500.

why? I mean, if reach is the only thing you want there's no point in updating 55-250mm to 70-300mm. Your 55-250mm even has better IS that canon's 70-300mm.

btw, Canon 100-400mm is ~$1500 new, so it is unlikely to find one ~$500 or so.

That's what I was wondering. That slight extra reach, if its worth it. I can always just crop. Ill probably eventually upgrade to the 100-400 for more of a reach but at that price, its not going to be somethin I buy tomorrow or next week but probably in the future.