Going from 70-300 to a 55-250 IS?

Have any of you done this? Do you find the 55-250 IS to have enough reach for shooting wildlife, birds, etc? I'm interested in one of these but wondered if I'd miss the 50mm of reach I have on my Sigma 70-300.

while I have no experiance with either of the two lenses you mentioned above, when shooting wildlife, I would try to get as much reach as i could. although i have heard good things about the 55-250.

If anything you can always try both out before you buy, and if you do go with the 250, you can get an extender/extension tubes.

Are you talking the 70-300 IS lens? If someone were to offer me a straight trade for my 55-250 I would take the 70-300IS in a heartbeat. I have the 55-250, and it is a nice compact lens and quite sharp. That being said, it is built on the cheap and has a plastic mount. The one time I used a 70-300 I was impressed with the build quality. For me, the 55-250 was a great way to get into a longer lens, but I bet at some point down the road I will be moving to something better.

DaveSt wrote in post #8882961
Are you talking the 70-300 IS lens?

No, I'm talking about my Sigma 70-300 non IS vs the Canon EF 55-250 IS.

Chappy wrote in post #8883232
No, I'm talking about my Sigma 70-300 non IS vs the Canon EF 55-250 IS.

Yep .. I guess I skipped right over that!

i think for what you're shooting the I.S. isn't really totally useful, it's nice still...but i think i'd just keep saving until you can afford more reach...with wildlife/birds, i think reach is king...

now if you find yourself using the lens in other situations where the I.S. would come in handy i'd do it...50mm really isn't much

Do it, the IS is amazing.

Don't walk, run to get the 55-250 to replace the Sigma 70-300.

Is your Sigma the APO or the cheaper one? The 55-250 is better than either but the 70-300 APO is closer in IQ but the IS makes a big difference on the Canon. The 50 mm you gain on the 70-300 is not a big deal but the clarity and contrast is much better on the Canon. Maybe the biggest gain is the focus speed of the 55-250 kills the Sigma.

I had the Sigma 70-300mm APO, and replaced it with the 55-250IS, and I have no regrets. The Canon, with the IS, is a superior lens. My 0.000000000000002 cents

Chappy wrote in post #8882243
Have any of you done this? Do you find the 55-250 IS to have enough reach for shooting wildlife, birds, etc? I'm interested in one of these but wondered if I'd miss the 50mm of reach I have on my Sigma 70-300.

The 55-250IS is I think a step up in image quality and has IS over the Sigma. But if you're shooting wildlife, birds, etc, consider something longer like the Sigma 150-500 OS. With the 250/300 I need to be very close to get a good bird shot that fills a majority of the frame.

Thanks for all the replies. I think I'd like the 55-250 IS. I've owned a 100-200 lens before and I think the 55-250 would be a nice lens to own. I'm not really into using a tripod for long lenses like the 150-500 so I think the 55-250 would be good.

Maybe a simple 3 lens lineup would be just right for me. Something like :

Sigma 18-50 EX
Canon EF 55-250 IS
Canon 50mm 1.8