Lens Questions

Hi am new here and also very new to photography. I recently picked up a Canon T1i that came with a 18-55mm lens. While this lens seems alright for taking pictures around the house i need something with more zoom My 6 year old son plays soccer and i am looking for a 200-300mm lens that will take decent pics. I am on a budget so i cannot afford an "L' lens. I have looking at the Canon 55-250mm, the Canon 70-300mm and the Tamron 18-270mm. I know they all range in price pretty well but i am looking for opinions on all three. I am leaning towards the 55-250mm based on the price because i am on a budgetbut if opinions are strong that it is not a good lens or decent lensthen i will save and get somethings else. Thanks for any help you guys can give me.

The best thing you can do is work out how high a price you will go to buy a lens. The reason is a lens will last many years and many camera body upgrades so it is better to invest well.


The Tamron 18-270mm will give you plenty of options without the need to swap lenses, but this will come at a cost of image quality, so it is normally best to split down the zoom range.


If you are looking at the 70-300 IS, the Canon 70-200 4L is a little more but worth the extra being "L" quality.

In terms of IQ I would probably rate these lenses:


1. Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS (~$550)
2. Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS (~$255)
3. Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 (~$630)


This is not a knock against Tamron but the fact that it's a "super zoom" means that IQ is compromised for the sake of range.


Have you read Bryan's reviews on the Canon's?


Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens Review


Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens Review


He has not reviewed that particular Tamron.


Another lens to consider would be the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L. It will blow all of these other lenses out of the water IQ-wise but it does not have IS. The IS version of this lens will cost you an additional $425 which is probably close to your whole budget :)


For you, I would probably consider the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS. I think that IS is very important for the focal length and especially for a new comer to photograhpy.

I did look at the 70-200 L lens but i think i would want IS.So far the 70-300 IS seems to be the pick from on here and friends recommendations.

If you are using the lens for sport then "IS" is not needed due to the high shutter speeds required to freeze the action. When I had the 70-200 F4L, I used it for horse riding events and didn't need "IS" and when I use my 24-105 IS 4L for the same I turn it off. "IS" is more for stationary objects with slow shutter speed and not for action stopping. Best thing for slow shutter speeds is still use a tripod.


If you are looking at the 70-300mm IS against the 70-200mm 4L the 70-200mm 4L wins hands down.

Sorry to keep asking so many questionsbut what are your opinions on this lens? I know it's more but i reallylike the size and weight of it.





http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=150&am p;modelid=9996

The EF 70-300 <span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;"]f/4-5,6 DO IS USM costs about 3 times the "regular" EF 70-300 <span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: x-small;"]f/4-5,6 IS USM and about twice the 70-200 f/4 L USM. Don't think about it now...

Here's what Bryan said about the 70-300 DO:


"The price? Too high for the resulting optical performance to me
personally.
I really like the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM Lens' size,
build, autofocus speed and top-notch IS, but I'm not completely
satisfied with the resulting image quality."

I think we meant the EF 70-300 4-5.6 IS USM. The Diffractive Optics version that you mentioned is way more expensive, and for the price, the image quality doesn't seem very good.

Thanks for all the replies so far! So basically the 70-200mm L lensor the 70-300 IS lens would work best for my needs and fit the price range i'm looking for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mike_d

So basically the 70-200mm L lensor the 70-300 IS lens would work best for my needs and fit the price range i'm looking for.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

---

The 70-200 - yes, the 70-300 - no. You said this is for sports, so you need the fastest lens you can get = wide max. aperture.


The 70-200 has constant f/4 aperture while the 70-300 at the long end is only f/5.6 - that is one stop slower than the 70-200... which equals to TWICE less light!

Ahh... That makes sense. Yeah this lens will be used for my sons soccer but for other things as well that is why i thought the 70-300 IS would be good too because it has the IS and the lower end L lens doesn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mike_d

Ahh... That makes sense. Yeah this lens will be used for my sons soccer but for other things as well that is why i thought the 70-300 IS would be good too because it has the IS and the lower end L lens doesn't.
<p style="CLEAR: both"]

---

<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: #000000; font-family: Verdana;"]The IS will be great for the "other things" but for sports such as children&rsquo;s soccer you'll probably want a shutter speed at around 1/250 to stop the action. At shutter speeds that fast the IS won't be very helpful but if you are taking shots of the huddle or where the subjects aren't moving too quickly the IS will really shine because you'll be able to shoot at speeds at around 1/30 which is way too slow to handhold the 70-200 f/4 non IS. Some people can hand-hold at slower shutter speeds but the rule of 1/focal length is a great rule of thumb. Remember that rule was created based on 35mm film/sensors so you will need to apply the 1.6X FOVCF to your Canon T1i. Here's an example:<o:p></o:p>


<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: #000000; font-family: Verdana;"]To hand-hold a 200mm lens on a 35mm sensor you would need a shutter speed of 1/200<o:p></o:p>


<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: #000000; font-family: Verdana;"]To hand-hold a 200mm lens on a 1.6X FOVCFsensor you would need a shutter speed of 1/320 (200 * 1.6)

Try and go to a shop and try them. I think you will go for the 70-200mm 4L when you can have a go with it. Also remember that the more light that comes in the faster the focusing. The ideal one would be the 70-200mm 2.8 or the 70-200mm 2.8 IS, if you had the cash, these let intwice the light in over the 4L and with xxD cameras which have a more sensitive focus point for f2.8 and lower means better focusing. The 70-200mm 2.8 is not much more than the70-300mm IS DO. I know someone who had the DO and is trading it in for the 7-200mm 2.8 IS now.


The 70-200mm 4L is amazing for the cost, thezoom ring is so smooth on it and when I used it for horse events it was so easy to zoom in and out, far better than the 24-105mm IS 4L which is the other lens I have. I now have upgraded my 4Lto the 2.8 IS which will now last for a long time. The thing is with the 2.8 IS, is that the IS is like the 100-400mm L, it has 2 options, one is nomal and the other is forpanning.

I think the image quality of the 55-250 is about equal with the 70-300, at overlapping focal lengths. Look at these two comparisons:


70-300 (sample 1) vs 55-250 at 200mm f/5.6


70-300 (sample 2) vs 55-250 at 200mm f/5.6


The 70-300 is a full-frame lens, that's why it costs more for the same quality.