Lens Choice - How Do People Decide?

[sleaver]

As per another thread I'm trying to decide between the Canon EF-S 55-250 or the 70-300 IS USM. The 55-250 seems to take photos of a good quality but for the extra money you get the better build.

On the other hand can I justify the extra just for an extra 50mm!

So basically when people are trying to decide between lenses do you have the same problem and if so how do you decide?

[happyhomer]

Hi, I think in your case what you need to consider (imo) is whether you will upgrade to a full-frame camera in the foreseeable future. If not, then I don't really see the benefit of spending the extra on the 70-300. As for the build quality, unless you really give your lenses a hard time it shouldn't be a problem for you, and the image quality won't suffer. As it happens I became the proud owner of a 70-300 IS USM a week ago, however being a film user who has no plans to move to digital until a full-frame body comes into my price-range I did not have the choice of the 55-250. I mainly got the lens for its IS capability; I already had an ageing 75-300 non-USM and this is a great step up, though tbh the increase in focussing speed with the USM is not that important to me.
Given that the 55-250 has a 4-stop IS compared to the 3-stop in the 70-300, if I was in your shoes (using a crop body) I would definitely go for the 55-250 and spend the money left over one something else for the photo bag. Even if you upgrade to a 5D MKii (or whatever) in the future, I don't think you'd lose much on the lens if you sold it on either.

Just my 2 penn'orth!

[dave_bass5]

After going for cheaper versions of lens's that i wanted in the past, and then selling them at a loss i now go for what ever i want in the first place. If i cant afford it ill put it on the credit card or wait.
plus, ill read up as much as i can about it as well.

I had this dilemma last year when i wanted the 70-200 f/4 IS but as its a lot more than the non Is version i thought long and hard. In the end though i knew i would need IS so bit the bullet. Glad i did because i know i would have sold on the non Is version sooner rather than later to get the better one.

In your case i would go for the 55-250 as well. It has a better IS system, goes a bit wider and you really wont miss the extra 50mm of the 70-300.

All IME and YMMV of course.

[sleaver]

Originally Posted by dave_bass5

After going for cheaper versions of lens's that i wanted in the past, and then selling them at a loss i now go for what ever i want in the first place. If i cant afford it ill put it on the credit card or wait.
plus, ill read up as much as i can about it as well.

I had this dilemma last year when i wanted the 70-200 f/4 IS but as its a lot more than the non Is version i thought long and hard. In the end though i knew i would need IS so bit the bullet. Glad i did because i know i would have sold on the non Is version sooner rather than later to get the better one.

In your case i would go for the 55-250 as well. It has a better IS system, goes a bit wider and you really wont miss the extra 50mm of the 70-300.

All IME and YMMV of course.

You've confused me with that one. To begin with you say that you've brought cheap lenses in the past and sold them at a lose and so go with what you want!

Although you then say get the cheap lens!

I agree that the 50mm won't be missed and if required I cold crop PP. Does the metal mount and the USM make that much of a difference?

I also wouldn't mind the 580EX II so what I save could go on that!

[dave_bass5]

Originally Posted by sleaver

You've confused me with that one. To begin with you say that you've brought cheap lenses in the past and sold them at a lose and so go with what you want!

Although you then say get the cheap lens!

I agree that the 50mm won't be missed and if required I cold crop PP. Does the metal mount and the USM make that much of a difference?

I also wouldn't mind the 580EX II so what I save could go on that!

sorry for the confusion.
what i meant was go for the one you want but that doesn't mean its the dearest one and if i was in your situation i would go for the 55-250 because out of those two lens's that would be the one i want. I dont fancy the 70-300 at all. Never did as when i wanted a longer lens i went for the 70-200f/4 IS.

Its just so happened that with me all the lens's i have wanted seem to be dear ones.

Ive been putting off getting a 580EXII for ages. I have a 420EX that seems ot do the trick at home but i really want a more powerful flash, just cant bring myself to order it (its quite cheap from onestop-digital.com though.)

[sleaver]

Originally Posted by dave_bass5

sorry for the confusion.
what i meant was go for the one you want but that doesn't mean its the dearest one and if i was in your situation i would go for the 55-250 because out of those two lens's that would be the one i want. I dont fancy the 70-300 at all. Never did as when i wanted a longer lens i went for the 70-200f/4 IS.

Its just so happened that with me all the lens's i have wanted seem to be dear ones.

Did you not go for the 70-300 just because you wanted the 70-200?

Since yesterday I think the 55-250 will do me as its only 50mm difference but then I'm the sort of person who want's better quality, but better quality for alot more is hard to justify!

[dave_bass5]

No, like i said, ive never fancied the 70-300.
I did have a Sigma 70-300APO and i liked that but realised i didnt use it much past 200mm. I had this while i had my 24-105L and i did use that quite a bit at 105mm in low light. when the 24-105L went i wanted something that was long, had good IS, was fast with a constant aperture, didnt extend and was very sharp and was reasonably light and small (hence, no 70-200 f/2.8 IS). Of course money was a problem but i thought what the heck, there isnt anything above this to crave so i doubt i would get rid of it.

I dont earn anything form this gear so you could say non of its justified but i got it anyway and enjoy using it.

Im not sure that the 70-300 is better quality, at least not image quality.

[dfrear]

I would get the 55-250 and if it's not your cup of tea, sell it on or buy from somewhere you can return it? Maybe somewhere like Jessops will allow you to buy at a higher price but return it afterwards. Then return it and buy cheap online

[Tobers]

Lens choice is a nightmare. I think the answer is to figure out what focal length & max aperture you need for what you want to photograph, then get the best that you can afford.

There are always tradeoffs - I'm looking at a 100-300 f/4 instead of a 120-300 f/2.8 because I cant afford the additional £600 for the 2.8 and I'll manage OK with the slower f/4. To get to this position I decided against a 100-400 4.5-5.6 which isn't that much more expensive than the 100-300, but clunkier to use, IQ not quite as good etc, and I know I can get 420mm with a 1.4x extender on the 100-300.

I also discounted a 300 prime due to cost (for the 2.8) and practicality (for the f4).

Sounds like you've figured out the zoominess that you want. Now check all the available options and look at the price/performance tradeoff. I find www.fredmiranda.com/reviews invaluable for this.

[sleaver]

OK, I'm getting down to business, aka trying to make a decision after 2 months! Plus before the cashback ends!

Two questions:

1) Do people think I would miss the 55-70 range if I went for the 70-300? I only have the 400D kit lens and 50 f1/8

2) If I went for the 55-250 would I miss the 50mm at the long end and the build quality?

[h4rri]

If you are after build & picture quality with reach then it would have to be the 70-300 DO IS, superb piece of glass.

The question isn't would you miss the 55-70 gap it's can you do without it? I think the 55-250 is in the line-up to compliment the 18-55 kit lens. I haven't seen much in the way of results from it but the tests I have seen favor it and score it highly but then the same can be said for the 70-300.

I would say go with your gut, which do you feel is right for you? Which suits your needs and your pocket right now? Discount what you could buy with what you save and choose based on the lens alone. At the end of the day I wouldn't honestly know if you would miss the reach or BQ, only you can answer that.

[Triggaaar]

Originally Posted by sleaver

1) Do people think I would miss the 55-70 range if I went for the 70-300? I only have the 400D kit lens and 50 f1/8
2) If I went for the 55-250 would I miss the 50mm at the long end and the build quality?

It really depends on what you are shooting. I was using my 80-200 yesterday and I would have preferred it to be a little wider (didn't have time to change lenses). If you can't move forward or back, the extra at the long end can always be made up for with cropping, but if you can't fit a subject in, that's that - but it really does depend on what you are shooting (dam, I said that already).

[loz]

I know that it isn't important to macho photo men but...

There is also size and weight to consider.

Yes, the 70-300 might be better built, have an extra 50mm, and similar if not better optical quality.

But the 55-250 is also half the size and weight...

So which would you rather carry around all day, especially if it is just a "day out" as opposed to a photography assignment?

Recently, walking around town I had my camera over my shoulder tourist style, and was able to just slip the 55-250 into my jacket pocket.
No bag, no fuss, no nerdiness, no terrorist alert...

[mucca_D]

Originally Posted by dave_bass5

when the 24-105L went ......

Why did it go? Sorry Op and not to hijack your thread, but I currently have a sigma 17-70 DC 2.8-4.5. And although I like it alot. (most time on body) I am looking at something a bit better and keep coming back to the 24-105L f4 IS USM.

Every report rates it, but at £500+ is it worth it?

I also have a niffty 50 1.8 and I also have the sigma 70-300APO ( don't use it as much as I thought I would)

So my thinking was get 24-105 for every day use. and sell the two sigmas to help fund it?

Again sorry to jump on to your thread

[johnaalex]

Originally Posted by Tobers

Lens choice is a nightmare. I think the answer is to figure out what focal length & max aperture you need for what you want to photograph, then get the best that you can afford.

There are always tradeoffs - I'm looking at a 100-300 f/4 instead of a 120-300 f/2.8 because I cant afford the additional £600 for the 2.8 and I'll manage OK with the slower f/4.

Tobers - have you considered a second 120-300 2.8? (NO, I am not selling mine).