Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 23 Sep 2010 (Thursday) 19:11
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

55-250 or 70-300 My head hurts.

 
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
10,247 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philly 'burbs
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:20 |  #31

The Ran wrote in post #10973248 (external link)
1 stop faster is nothing compared to 3-4 stops from IS. And before you say that the 1 stop advantage could be helpful with sports to freeze motion, the lighting needs to be so bad that your at the limit of acceptable ISO and can't afford to bump it up a stop and you're needing to shoot wide open. Image quality and USM are fair points, of course they both depend on what body Ultimate is using, and it's not as if the 55-250mm has ****e image quality to begin with.

You can buy a monopod to "add" IS to any lens. You can NOT add a stop of light.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
The ­ Ran
Goldmember
1,555 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Hertford, England
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:21 |  #32

DreDaze wrote in post #10973253 (external link)
the same could be said for a 200mm f2...do you see a problem with your argument yet?

That's also like a 2 and a half stop advantage, not 1. However it's also still a bad suggestion.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Ran
Goldmember
1,555 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Hertford, England
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:23 |  #33

egordon99 wrote in post #10973279 (external link)
You can buy a monopod to "add" IS to any lens. You can NOT add a stop of light.

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. The 70-200mm f/4 has a 1 stop advantage over the 55-250mm. The 55-250mm's IS allows you to hand hold at speeds something like 3 or 4 stops slower than without IS.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
10,247 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philly 'burbs
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:23 |  #34

The Ran wrote in post #10973280 (external link)
That's also like a 2 and a half stop advantage, not 1. However it's also still a bad suggestion.

Some folks would rather have the extra stop and the extra AF speed. You don't think it's worth it. That doesn't mean the folks who DO think it's worth it are wrong.

There is NOTHING subjective about that extra stop. What's subjective is whether or not YOU find it worthwhile.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Ran
Goldmember
1,555 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Hertford, England
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:27 |  #35

egordon99 wrote in post #10973296 (external link)
Some folks would rather have the extra stop and the extra AF speed. You don't think it's worth it. That doesn't mean the folks who DO think it's worth it are wrong.

There is NOTHING subjective about that extra stop. What's subjective is whether or not YOU find it worthwhile.

That extra stop is worthless except in extreme circumstances when you're shooting moving objects and need a shutter speed fast enough to freeze that motion but you can't increase the ISO anymore, any other situation where you're shooting something stationary or slower moving IS will be a much bigger advantage.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
10,247 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philly 'burbs
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:28 |  #36

The Ran wrote in post #10973294 (external link)
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. The 70-200mm f/4 has a 1 stop advantage over the 55-250mm. The 55-250mm's IS allows you to hand hold at speeds something like 3 or 4 stops slower than without IS.

IS can NOT stop motion. It only prevents CAMERA shake (not subject shake)

So let's say the light is such that you at f/5.6 and ISO800, you need 1/60s. Decent speed for anything that's not running around. BUT you have IS! So you can slow down to 1/15s and ISO200! woohoo! But do you really want to shoot something that is alive and breathing at 1/15s? If you could open up to f/4, you could go to 1/125s which is a bit better. I would rather be shooting at 1/125s than 1/15s. And if you're a bit shaky, that's where my monopod comment came from. With the f/5.6 lens, you'd have to bump the ISO to 1600 to get 1/125s, and that is when you start to get into yucky territory with high ISO.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:28 |  #37

egordon99 wrote in post #10973296 (external link)
Some folks would rather have the extra stop and the extra AF speed. You don't think it's worth it. That doesn't mean the folks who DO think it's worth it are wrong.

There is NOTHING subjective about that extra stop. What's subjective is whether or not YOU find it worthwhile.

Yes and some folks like the OP wants a lens with IS on it :lol: !


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
10,247 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philly 'burbs
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:28 |  #38

The Ran wrote in post #10973319 (external link)
That extra stop is worthless except in extreme circumstances when you're shooting moving objects and need a shutter speed fast enough to freeze that motion but you can't increase the ISO anymore, any other situation where you're shooting something stationary or slower moving IS will be a much bigger advantage.

And that is why people pay more for an extra stop! Why are we arguing again?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Ran
Goldmember
1,555 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Hertford, England
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:29 |  #39

egordon99 wrote in post #10973323 (external link)
IS can NOT stop motion. It only prevents CAMERA shake (not subject shake)

So let's say the light is such that you at f/5.6 and ISO800, you need 1/60s. Decent speed for anything that's not running around. BUT you have IS! So you can slow down to 1/15s and ISO200! woohoo! But do you really want to shoot something that is alive and breathing at 1/15s? If you could open up to f/4, you could go to 1/125s which is a bit better. I would rather be shooting at 1/125s than 1/15s. And if you're a bit shaky, that's where my monopod comment came from. With the f/5.6 lens, you'd have to bump the ISO to 1600 to get 1/125s, and that is when you start to get into yucky territory with high ISO.

First of all I never said IS can stop motion, in fact I said the exact opposite. Read my last post to save me explaining it again.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
10,247 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philly 'burbs
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:29 |  #40

CountryBoy wrote in post #10973325 (external link)
Yes and some folks like the OP wants a lens with IS on it :lol: !

Then the 55-250 is an excellent choice! I was responding to someone asking "Why would ANYONE buy the 70-200 f/4?"




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Ran
Goldmember
1,555 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Hertford, England
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:32 |  #41

egordon99 wrote in post #10973328 (external link)
And that is why people pay more for an extra stop! Why are we arguing again?

Because people were making silly suggestions, that's why. How often is Ultimate going to be caught in those extreme circumstances? Maybe a few times, although most times he can probably bump the ISO up a stop and take the extra noise. How many times will he be caught when he's getting shutter speeds 3 to 4 stops slower than what's usually hand holdable? Probably much more often, and with that 1 stop advantage at f/4 you're still going to have to bump the ISO up at least another 2 stops.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,381 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3282
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:33 |  #42

The Ran wrote in post #10973248 (external link)
Image quality and USM are fair points, of course they both depend on what body Ultimate is using

it doesn't matter what body he's using...whatever it is the 70-200mm will have better image quality, and focusing speed on it...yeah, the 55-250mm will beat it in cost, and IS, and reach i guess...but those three things don't always add up to a better lens for the job...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Ran
Goldmember
1,555 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Hertford, England
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:34 |  #43

egordon99 wrote in post #10973336 (external link)
Then the 55-250 is an excellent choice! I was responding to someone asking "Why would ANYONE buy the 70-200 f/4?"

I take it you're referring to me. If you learn to read you'll see I never asked why anyone would buy the 70-200 f/4, I asked why anyone would suggest it to Ultimate.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,381 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3282
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:38 |  #44

The Ran wrote in post #10973360 (external link)
I take it you're referring to me. If you learn to read you'll see I never asked why anyone would buy the 70-200 f/4, I asked why anyone would suggest it to Ultimate.

it's definitely not a bad suggestion...he mentions sports the faster focusing would help there...and as already mentioned the extra stop...not just for a faster shutter, but also more subject isolation...

i mean his handle is ultimate, and he's got a picture of a guy playing ultimate frisbee as his avatar...i bet he's going to be using it for some sports


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
10,247 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philly 'burbs
     
Sep 24, 2010 20:42 |  #45

The Ran wrote in post #10973360 (external link)
I take it you're referring to me. If you learn to read you'll see I never asked why anyone would buy the 70-200 f/4, I asked why anyone would suggest it to Ultimate.

I apologize, I forgot your "name" and was too lazy to scroll up :confused:

He did mention sports so I still think it's a valid suggestion. It is GOOD to have lots of choices. I started out shooting Pentax and we had NO 70-200s. I switched to Canon and we had SIX choices! (the four Canon Ls, and the Tamron and Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 lenses)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,805 views & 0 likes for this thread
55-250 or 70-300 My head hurts.
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is ibflyin
861 guests, 238 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.