First lens upgrade : 70-300mm f/4-5.6

I also had both 70-300 IS and the 55-250 IS (still have.)

Although impressed with the 70-300, I did not see much of a difference between the 2. Unless you plan on using it for Full frame, I'd get the 55-250 which on my XTi, works fine. They're relatively cheap! Plus, on a crop, the 55 is useful.

I don' t use the 55-250 much unless I travel light, since getting the 70-200 f/4 IS. The L is worth the $400 more than the 70-300 in my opinion. I don't even use my primes anymore because of this lens!

(posted this picture on another thread) XTi, ISO 800, using my 55-250 IS.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

the 70-300mm is a good lens...go for it

Well rjv, like I said I really dont have like 750 or $1000 to put down on a nice L lens. My parents are going to disney and are going to help pay for the lens so I thought I would try to get the best I could afford and get the 70-300

ihaveworms wrote in post #7715629
Well rjv, like I said I really dont have like 750 or $1000 to put down on a nice L lens. My parents are going to disney and are going to help pay for the lens so I thought I would try to get the best I could afford and get the 70-300

You could get the 55-250, upgrade the 18-55 to the IS model, and get a 430 EX flash, for about what a 70-300 would cost. Any loss of utility as a result of getting the 55-250 rather than the 70-300 (if indeed there is any) would be more than offset by the huge improvement in image quality offered by the 18-55 IS and the very considerable benefits of a dedicated flash.

I do plan on upgrading to the 18-55 IS possibly later this year or sometime next year, but I don't use my flash that much as I take outdoor shots mostly or shots where there is a lot of light.

I have shot with the 70-300 and compared to the 70-200 f4 I had at that time. I found the lens to be quite good. The IQ was close (the 70-200 was better), but more importantly the 70-200 seemed to focus faster. That reason alone was enough for me to keep it and sacrfice the extra reach.

I can't comment on the 55-250mm but I can say that I own both the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS and the 70-200 f/2.8L IS and I end up with the 70-300 in my camera bag about 99% of the time due to the extra reach and the weight savings. Don't get me wrong the 70-200 is an awesome lens and I use it for portrait work (which isn't that often). It is sharp and focuses much faster.

That said the Image Quality of the 70-300 is amazing. The more I use it the more I am impressed with it. I've posted several images in the Lens Archive. I took both of these last week.Keep in mind that this is a pretty tight crop and I don't do Photoshop. The second one was at f/5 ISO, 1000 on my 40D

Also I almost forgot... I have an e-bay hood on mine and I sub $20 Tiffen Filter on mine and get these results.

Within a certain distance (say, 75ft.) the Canon 55-250 IS is sharp and the image quality and colors are really good, it's got to be one of the better "budget"zooms
- example

I got my lens in and took a few pictures today. I have noticed that there is a pretty narrow width of how much is in focus when you take pictures when zoomed in pretty far and I see that many of you (like that eagle) seem to be zoomed in very close yet still have a good focus "width" so that the entire eagle is in focus. How do you do that?

Here is a pic I took today:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

The more you magnify the image, either with a long telephoto lens, or by getting very close to the subject, your depth of field will decrease.

Your bee is very small and needs more magnification than the eagle. The bee was shot at f/8. If you change the aperture to something like f16, you will have more depth of field.

A larger aparature number, say f/11, and a slower shutter speed, to correct the exposure will give a longer depth of field.

msowsun,

you type faster than me.

You can also increase the ISO so that you can keep a fast shutter speed with an aperture like f11 or f16.

if the lens is f/4-5.6 how can it do over 5.6 or under 4? I don't understand how that is happening.

f/4.6-5.6 is the largest, wide open aperture that your lens is capable of. Most lenses can be "stopped down to about f/22 or f/32.