Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Canon 55-250 IS or 75-300 non IS

  • 27-02-2010 12:52pm
    #1
    Andrew33
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭


    Hi, I want to buy a new lens for my 450D, currently have kit 18-55 IS and Tamron 55-200. I like to photo planes but need a bit more "reach" for stuff at altitude. Both of the lens in title are similar money, am I right in thinking the 300mm is only a 4X while the 250mm is closer to a 5X. The amount of choice when it comes to lenses is staggering not to mention off putting:)
    Any and all comments welcome. ta. I'd love an "L" 400 or 500 but wife won't let me sell the house.


Comments

  • #2
    .Longshanks.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,718 ✭✭✭.Longshanks.


    When it comes to removable lens, the larger the number the longer the reach (assuming each lens is being mounted on the same DSLR).
    So the 75-300 will have a longer reach than the 55-250 as the 300mm> 250mm.

    The 75-300 will also cover a wider range, however the 55-250 starts off wider (since 55mm is wider than 70mm)


  • #3
    5uspect
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,518 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    The x you refer to is simply the widest angle divided by the longest angle. It's a measure of what range of field of view a lens can give you. It is not magnification.

    So the 75-300 is 4x and the 55-250 is 4.5x. The important thing is that the 75-300 gives you more "reach". Also have a look at teleconverters. You can get 1.4 and 2x converters that may help you attain that extra reach.


  • #4
    alexlyons
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,182 ✭✭✭alexlyons


    teleconverters tend to need a fair bit more light than a slightly longer lens.


  • #5
    5uspect
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,518 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    alexlyons wrote: »
    teleconverters tend to need a fair bit more light than a slightly longer lens.

    That's true but if you're shooting planes at altitude there should be plenty of light.


  • #6
    alexlyons
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,182 ✭✭✭alexlyons


    5uspect wrote: »
    That's true but if you're shooting planes at altitude there should be plenty of light.

    true but you can get some pretty good shots of planes in bad weather, dawn, dusk etc and a teleconverter won't be of a huge amount of use then. Granted a 1.5x converter will give you more overall range than a slightly longer lens, but a longer lens would allow for use in almost any scenario, unlike the converter.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Andrew33
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭Andrew33


    Thanks all, so the general consensus is go with the 300mm non IS lens? On the converters, I've seen them on Ebay, have always felt a bit suss on them. Are they worth a punt? also, if light is an issue with them, can't you just compensate with the settings on your camera?


  • #8
    alexlyons
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,182 ✭✭✭alexlyons


    i reckon the non IS lens would be fine if you've got good light in general and aren't moving about to much as you take the photos (moving vehicle etc) IS basically lets you use a few stops slower shutter speed than you would without it. so if your speeds are pretty fast then you'll be perfectly fine. A non IS lens in low(ish) light with a teleconverter is just asking for blurred or underexposed photos IMO. People tend to go with converters for a time and then get out of them due to the restrictions they have compared to the overall benefit.


  • #9
    Andrew33
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭Andrew33


    I've just had a quick look online, they're the same price as a lens! I reckon I'll just go with the 300mm lens.


  • #10
    alexlyons
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,182 ✭✭✭alexlyons


    ye sorry I should have said that! the price is one of the main reasons people generally go for the lens as a bit extra for a decent lens is always worth it!


  • #11
    5uspect
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,518 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    alexlyons wrote: »
    true but you can get some pretty good shots of planes in bad weather, dawn, dusk etc and a teleconverter won't be of a huge amount of use then. Granted a 1.5x converter will give you more overall range than a slightly longer lens, but a longer lens would allow for use in almost any scenario, unlike the converter.

    I just threw it out there since the OP is on a budget.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    alexlyons
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,182 ✭✭✭alexlyons


    5uspect wrote: »
    I just threw it out there since the OP is on a budget.

    Oh ye I know, I'm not trying to shoot it down or whatever, just making sure he sees all sides before making a decision. They are handy in certain situations.


  • #13
    LeoB
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,256 ✭✭✭LeoB


    I have the 55-250 I.S. and would HIGHLY recommend it. My favoutite lens. I have the 75-300 also but hardly use it. 55-250 is also quite compact and light


  • #14
    5uspect
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,518 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    I got the older 55-200 with my 350D back in the day. It wasn't terribly sharp or fast but a good lens all the same in good light. I've read good things about the newer 55-250 and 18-55 in terms of improvements in image quality.

    I still perfer my 70-200 f2.8 IS tho!


  • #15
    Andrew33
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭Andrew33


    LeoB wrote: »
    I have the 55-250 I.S. and would HIGHLY recommend it. My favoutite lens. I have the 75-300 also but hardly use it. 55-250 is also quite compact and light

    You hardly use it? thinking of selling it?:D:D
    On the aperature thing, What sort of numbers should I be looking for to suit my 450D?


  • #16
    the_monkey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,556 ✭✭✭the_monkey


    what about stretching it a little and getting the 70-300 IS f4-5.6 ... its an amazing lens ... almost L quality ....

    check these out ...

    http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2680/4390911132_24050ccf41_b.jpg

    http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4042/4390899252_9e37b03177_b.jpg


    taken with said lens and 5dmkii body .... but i had this before with the
    400d and still was amazed with the quality ...


  • #17
    Andrew33
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭Andrew33


    the_monkey wrote: »
    what about stretching it a little and getting the 70-300 IS f4-5.6 ... its an amazing lens ... almost L quality ....

    check these out ...

    http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2680/4390911132_24050ccf41_b.jpg

    http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4042/4390899252_9e37b03177_b.jpg


    taken with said lens and 5dmkii body .... but i had this before with the
    400d and still was amazed with the quality ...

    Stretch it a little??? you're talking €150 for the non IS 75-300 and over€400 for the 70-300 IS
    Thats a stretch I could not make at the moment.:(


  • #18
    the_monkey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,556 ✭✭✭the_monkey


    OK ....

    Then i don't know much about the 55-250 IS , but i read in reviews it's
    almost as good as the 70-300 ... and IS is important so i'd go for that one ..


  • #19
    Sleepy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,271 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    I have the 55-250 IS and got some pretty good shots of the Bray air show with it last year.


  • #20
    Andrew33
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭Andrew33


    Sleepy wrote: »
    I have the 55-250 IS and got some pretty good shots of the Bray air show with it last year.

    Put them up, put them up!


  • #21
    Andrew33
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭Andrew33


    I've decided (after much thought and advice here) to stretch to the Canon 70-300 IS USM lens, I've seen it online from Germany for around the €300 mark which compares very favourably with anyone closer, even from the UK its €450ish. Anyone any thoughts on buying lens online or better to buy it here in Ireland? Gunns in Wexford st keeps popping up as being good but can't find any website for them.:confused:


  • Advertisement
Advertisement