Lens Questions

[mike_d]

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.

[jasbsar]

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.

[Mark Elberson]

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.

[mike_d]

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.

[jasbsar]

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.

[mike_d]

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

[pierlux]

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...

[Oren]

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."

[alexniedra]

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.

[mike_d]

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.