Relatively budget telephoto lens

smnoamls

Hey guys

long story short:
Got canon eos450d, happy with it, need a telephoto lens.
I currently have a few good lens for relatively short range, up to 70mm.
I have a 55-250 canon usm is, kit lens.
Its ok at best, but not good.
I need a replacement, longer range, but I don't want to break the bank , so up to 500$.

I'll appreciate any recommendations.
SmNoamLs

Uncle Dude · 05-13-2012, 16:36 | posts: 2,080 | Location: USA

I think the Canon EF 70-300 f3.5/5.6 is quite good for the money. They can be had for under $450 on Amazon (mine was $550 last year). Solid image quality and great image stabilization - I shot this handheld at full zoom with my 600d/t3i:

smnoamls · 05-13-2012, 18:04 | posts: 1,427 | Location: israel

I love it when a lens you've had an eye on is the one recommended

Thanks man

Oh, and fantastic shot. Great focusing.
Did you do any post editing on it?
SmNoamLs

Uncle Dude · 05-13-2012, 18:14 | posts: 2,080 | Location: USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by smnoamls

Did you do any post editing on it?

I can't recall what I did, but typically I sharpen a bit and not much else, unless I've really screwed up my settings.

At the time I didn't know about unsharp masking, so the bokeh would be a bit smoother than it is here. I'll be going back and re-editing hundreds of RAW files from that trip...just need to get motivated. Good luck!

EDIT-Here's a video of the same scene - turned out nice, I think.

https://vimeo.com/28537264

smnoamls · 05-13-2012, 18:47 | posts: 1,427 | Location: israel

Very nice

I cant find the 3.5/5.6 anymore. the f4/5.6 is all I found.
Drastically worse?

Uncle Dude · 05-13-2012, 18:49 | posts: 2,080 | Location: USA

D'oh, it is indeed 4.0/5.6. I confused it with my 15-85.

sirrith · 05-14-2012, 08:45 | posts: 1,574

The tamron 70-300 VC USD is better than the canon 70-300 IS USM in every way (better IQ, faster focus, better VC, non-rotating front element, better build). And its a lot cheaper at the moment thanks to a $100 rebate.

However, your 55-250 has great IQ. Don't expect a big jump going to either the canon or tamron 70-300. If this is the area in which you find your 55-250 lacking, then you either need to upgrade to something far better, or improve your technique (yes, even with IS technique does matter).

To tell the truth, you aren't even going to see a "major" improvement in IQ going to something along the lines of a 70-200, the 55-250 is that good.

If your reasons are however, things like AF, build quality, etc... then you have a good reason to upgrade, because this is where the 55-250 fails to meet expectations.

These shots are examples of what the 55-250 is capable of:

I currently use a 70-200, but I still keep the 55-250 because I know if I need something small and compact, it'll deliver the results.

sovietdoc · 05-15-2012, 20:52 | posts: 698 | Location: h4x0r_lund

If you're after quality, none of these lenses will deliver. Quality starts to pickup at 70-200 f/4. In fact, in comparison to all other lens like 70-300 and 55-250 or whatever, I'd say it doesn't just pick up. It skyrockets to the top.

But this pixel-peeping quality is only really needed for large prints, so you can take your original photo and the edges are super sharp and there is no CA to be seen. Most people can get along with 55-250 or a better version of that, just fine. And if you downscale the picture a little bit, you'll get decent results.

Usually if you are not sure if you need a lens like 70-200 f/4L or f/2.8L, that means you don't, and you can get by with something else with great results.

Glidefan · 05-15-2012, 22:00 | posts: 11,890 | Location: Solar System, Earth, Med, Cyprus

I had a Sigma 55-250 zoom lens (i think it was that range) It was so inconsistent with focusing and missed so many shots, that i actually got angry, and saved for a 70-200 f4 IS.
I love that lens even though i'm not using its range the whole time.

bballfreak6 · 05-16-2012, 00:32 | posts: 1,220 | Location: Brisbane, Australia

yep agree on saving for the 70-200 f4, shot a wedding as 2nd shooter last weekend with friend's 70-200 2.8 IS mk1 (for the first time too) and it's just awesome, so versatile even on a crop body and the image it renders is just so nice

the f4 is supposed to be better optically than the 2.8 mk1 so it really makes it fantastic lens for the price and you still have the option to stack a 1.4 tc to make it longer while still maintaining AF

ScoobyDooby · 06-13-2012, 05:07 | posts: 5,260 | Location: BC, Canada

once you have used the 70-200 lenses there is really no way to go back. I've had the 70-200 non IS as well as the 55-250 and really I would never go back to the 55-250 even though I sold my 70-200 long time ago now. I'd way sooner save up and purchase it again, perhaps IS version.

That said, I do like Tamron lenses.. shame that they don't have any lenses that rival Canon in that regard.

kanej2007 · 06-13-2012, 05:52 | posts: 5,701 | Location: Dubai, UAE / London, UK

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScoobyDooby

once you have used the 70-200 lenses there is really no way to go back.

This. I would go for the 70-200 f4...

sirrith · 06-13-2012, 11:50 | posts: 1,574

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScoobyDooby

That said, I do like Tamron lenses.. shame that they don't have any lenses that rival Canon in that regard.

Tamron's 70-200 2.8 is every bit as good as its canon counterpart in terms of IQ, it suffers from slow AF though.

kanej2007 · 06-13-2012, 13:48 | posts: 5,701 | Location: Dubai, UAE / London, UK

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirrith

Tamron's 70-200 2.8 is every bit as good as its canon counterpart in terms of IQ, it suffers from slow AF though.

And is noisy!

ScoobyDooby · 06-14-2012, 17:03 | posts: 5,260 | Location: BC, Canada

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirrith

Tamron's 70-200 2.8 is every bit as good as its canon counterpart in terms of IQ, it suffers from slow AF though.

exactly.. however the other notable point I found was build quality.. the tamrons are good, but the canon 70-200 are awesome. things are real sturdy imo

sirrith · 06-14-2012, 17:31 | posts: 1,574

I'd like to see tamron update theirs with VC and USD and the new build quality they have with their 24-70. Should give canon a run for their money.

Mozaik · 07-25-2012, 20:38 | posts: 454 | Location: Croatia

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Dude

I think the Canon EF 70-300 f3.5/5.6 is quite good for the money. They can be had for under $450 on Amazon (mine was $550 last year). Solid image quality and great image stabilization - I shot this handheld at full zoom with my 600d/t3i:

Awesome video,I like this furry being

I have bought a couple of days ago my first DSLR- a Canon Eos 550d with the 18-55 + 75-300 kit.What do you guys (and girls?) think about it?I find it great

And what are the best lens for macros?

saud1 · 08-26-2012, 13:33 | posts: 63 | Location: Saudi Arabia

i think Canon L series lenses r the top notch, their build quality and image quality both r great at the same time but they're too expensive

Glidefan · 08-26-2012, 21:05 | posts: 11,890 | Location: Solar System, Earth, Med, Cyprus

And honestly, if a lens is not an L, it doesn't mean that its not a good performer.
It just means that under heavy use out in the elements, it is going to last longer.

neubdetat · 08-27-2012, 13:37 | posts: 25 | Location: Singapore

The 70-200 f4L (non-is), like everyone says, would be a great addition that will last you for a very long time (or until you save up for the 2.8L II IS!)