New lenses for my 300D?

[Hallsy]

I've had my 300D since March, which I got as a stepping stone into the DSLR world, after I had a play with my father-in-law's D40, and also I had got into a few film lomo cameras beforhand.

Anyway, I got it with the kit 18-55mm lens and a Sigma non-APO 70-300mm.

Obviously I'm learning all the time, and I know practice is a big part of it, but I'm wondering about upgrading some of my lenses.

I'm not happy with not having an overlap between the 55 & 70mm, and also there have been times in low light when at full extension, hand-held, the 70-300mm suffers from my shaky hands!! So I was thinking about an IS zoom lens as a replacement.

I had initially thought about the 17-85mm USM IS to replace the kit lens, but it's a bit pricey for me and I have heard that it isn't actually all that special in terms of optics.

So, is there anything that would be worth upgrading the kit lens to that isn't too expensive, maybe something from Tamron or Sigma, maybe a little faster? Not too worried about IS on a lens up to 50-70mm say.

Failing that I have noticed that the Canon 55-250mm IS can be had quite cheaply, would it be much of an upgrade over my Sigma? Would I notice much difference with the 250mm vs 300mm?

I also plan to buy a nifty fifty for the shallow depth of field, again, is the Canon f/1.8 worth getting, or is there something from Sigma or Tamron that may be better in terms of IQ, or focusing, but a similar price?

I'm off to Le Mans next month and really hope to get some good shots, I've not been before but I'm guessing I'll be needing a fair amount of zoom, so this is where IS may help me!!

[cedmondson]

I had a 300D until late last year. It will definitely benefit from better lenses.

Firstly though I don't think the gap between 55-70mm is itself a reason to upgrade. You can check this by putting your camera on a tripod (or similar) and taking a photo of the same subject at 55mm and another at 70mm. It's rarely likely to be more than a pace or so difference and you could always crop a little.

The 55-250mm is a great lens and good value for money. Definitely better than the non-APO Sigma. IS will enable you to get handheld shots at slower speeds than a non-IS lens BUT it won't help much with fast moving subjects such as motor racing. I don't think the difference between 250 & 300mm should concern you much.

The best modestly priced upgrade for the kit lens is the Tamron 17-50 F2.8 IMHO. Expect to pay significantly more for anything better.

Finally there's nothing to touch the nifty fifty at similar prices.

[Hallsy]

Thanks for that advice

I see what you mean about the difference between 55 & 70mm, I think the hang up more so with my Sigma is the minimum focus distance which is 1.5m, or 0.95m when on macro between 200 & 300mm. The canon 55-250IS is 1.1m min focus distance so would be better.

It wasn't so much the IS that I wanted specifically for le mans and shooting moving objects, but more so in poor light where I am suffering from hand shake a little. The other week I was out at the beach in the evening and forgot to use ISO to compensate for slow shutter speeds and was disappointed with the results when I got home!
I know IS isn't everything but it will at least help me when I'm being human!! Or even if the light is so poor that ISO & aperture can't save a slow shutter.

I'm going to have a play with my Sigma later and compare 250 to 300mm as I think the 55-250IS could well be the one for me to go for, especially at the price.

I also find the zoom ring on my Sigma quite awkward when 'hunting' around a certain area, it sometimes gets a little stiff.

I will also look up the Tamron lens you mentioned, I have no real reason to upgrade the kit lens yet, although maybe if I were to compare other lenses I would see a reason to!

[Hallsy]

Well I've been out with my Sigma this morning and I think I can handle the difference between 250mm & 300mm, it's probably just a case of stepping forward a little.

I'm going to have a bit more of a read around on the 55-250mm IS before I make my mind up, but it's lightweight body and hopeful improvement in IQ go in it's favour, the plastic mount not so much though.

Throwing a spanner in the works, would the Sigma 70-300 APO have better IQ than the Canon 55-250? I'm also wondering if I should spend the extra on the 70-300IS, although in fairness I have a few other expenses at the moment that would go against this.

[cedmondson]

Originally Posted by Hallsy

Throwing a spanner in the works, would the Sigma 70-300 APO have better IQ than the Canon 55-250? I'm also wondering if I should spend the extra on the 70-300IS...

No, the 55-250 has better IQ than the Sigma APO.
If you can stretch to the Canon 70-300IS, I'd say definitely do it. Very good IQ indeed (better than either the 55-250IS or the Sigma APO). I upgraded to this from the Sigma APO and consider it a much better lens.

[Chris83]

I had the 55-250mm IS and it's a great lens. The IQ is great, the lens feels pretty solid for one built of plastic.
I got rid of mine and upgraded to the 70-300mm IS and thats even better. If you can afford the extra £150 I'd go for that, failing that get the 55-250mm.

[senu]

Originally Posted by cedmondson

No, the 55-250 has better IQ than the Sigma APO.
If you can stretch to the Canon 70-300IS, I'd say definitely do it. Very good IQ indeed (better than either the 55-250IS or the Sigma APO). I upgraded to this from the Sigma APO and consider it a much better lens.

Ditto
I would suggest you carry on with the Sigma till you can afford the 70 -300IS for a better lens
The 50mm range can be very competently deal with by the 50mm 1.8 which is phenomenal VFM at £50

[Hallsy]

I will be buying a 50mm f/1.8 anyway, at the price and results I've seen it's a no brainer!

I can see the benfit in the 70-300mm IS, but I'm not sure that it's worth paying double over the 55-250mm IS for slightly better IQ, and 50mm extra range. It's a tough one, I wonder how much 2nd hand 70-300mm IS's go for!

[senu]

Originally Posted by Hallsy

I can see the benefit in the 70-300mm IS, but I'm not sure that it's worth paying double over the 55-250mm IS for slightly better IQ, and 50mm extra range. It's a tough one, I wonder how much 2nd hand 70-300mm IS's go for!

I always say buy the best lens you can afford.
There is a certain satisfaction you (should) get each time you use a good lens that ultimately lingers ( time and time again) long after the pain of paying extra has gone
There is more to life than taking good photographs but getting decent kit whilst doing it is a justifiable expense (IMHO)
Unless you dont plan to use the lens regularly, you may find that calling the quality " slightly better IQ" is a bit of rationalising
Dont forget any lenses you buy can always be used on a better body you may get later on
Good luck anyhow