[RatzUk]

Hi all, i'd like some opinions if possible on a first choice tele lens to fit a Canon 450D + 18-55 IS lens kit

I've read various reviews on the two lenses and i'm still confused.. What would be the best choice bearing in mind the price difference of the two lenses. Will be used for sporting events

Is USM really worth the extra money?
Are review sites overly critical of every lens costing under £1000 ?

Thanks very much for any help offered

[richard plumb]

i've found lightrules someone who posts fair reviews. I think it was him who called the 70-300is the 'nifty 300', comparing it to the nifty 50mm 1.8 as a great value lens.

I found mine had great image quality and excellent reach. I 'upgraded'to the 70-200f4 l is, but although it was much faster focusing, i missed the long end, so sold it. I now have the 100-400 which is fantastic, but blooming should be at that price!

I haven't used the 55-250, but it is supposed to be almost on par huh the 70-300. Perhaps slightly slower at focusing, but almost nothing in it. So .i'd recommend the 55-250. The two new is lenses from canon both seem to be really big improvements over the previous non-is versions

[joonyar]

Originally Posted by RatzUk

Hi all, i'd like some opinions if possible on a first choice tele lens to fit a Canon 450D + 18-55 IS lens kit

I've read various reviews on the two lenses and i'm still confused.. What would be the best choice bearing in mind the price difference of the two lenses. Will be used for sporting events

Is USM really worth the extra money?
Are review sites overly critical of every lens costing under £1000 ?

Thanks very much for any help offered

Hi, I was in exactly the same boat as you are now in.
I got my 450D with the kit lens & I wanted a reasonably priced decent tele lens.
Obviously the 2 that leapt out are the 2 that you are considering. I read several reviews trawelled through loads of stuff on AVForums & I still couldnt make up my mind.
In the end I decided to spend the extra for the 70-300, I'm going to be using it mostly for wildlife so going to 300 will be helpful, but the most important factor for me was that I didnt want to regret NOT buying the 70-300.

[tdodd]

The revews here seem to take cost into account and give a fair appraisal of each lens, backed up with some scientific measurements.

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/overview

You say you want to shoot sport but that covers a multitude of disciplines, close up and distant, fast moving and slow, indoors and out, in sunshine and in rain, at daytime and in the dark, with a clear view or behind safety fencing. Generally a sports lens needs to be fast (wide aperture) and with a focal length to suit the distances involved, so anything from a fisheye for close up flash lit BMXers to 600mm plus for a distant field event. So can you be a bit more specific?

[ryanyboy]

This is just my opinion but I've used them both and personally I think the 55-250 IS is the better lens.

This is purely anecdotal but I felt the IQ was better on the cheaper lens and the fact that it is cheaper would make it my choice.

Just opinions but hope it helps.

Ryan

[jonnypb]

Used/Owned them both

IQ is very similar I doubt you'll be able to tell the difference
Build, The 70-300 is better built but it is quite a bit bigger as well
The 55-250IS has the newer 4 stop IS system
If you pair the 55-250 with your kit lens you won't lose any focal range

I have the 55-250 and really like it. After owning it would I upgrade/spend the extra for the 70-300? No

For the money and size of the lens I'd go for the 55-250

[RatzUk]

Originally Posted by tdodd

You say you want to shoot sport but that covers a multitude of disciplines, close up and distant, fast moving and slow, indoors and out, in sunshine and in rain, at daytime and in the dark, with a clear view or behind safety fencing. Generally a sports lens needs to be fast (wide aperture) and with a focal length to suit the distances involved, so anything from a fisheye for close up flash lit BMXers to 600mm plus for a distant field event. So can you be a bit more specific?

Sorry for not being specific about the usage but it would be used for close up and distant, fast moving and slow, outdoors, in sunshine and in rain, at daytime, with a clear view and behind safety fencing.
hmmm that didn't help much

Thanks for replies, off to read some more reviews then to try out in shop. Still none the wiser

[tdodd]

Originally Posted by RatzUk

Sorry for not being specific about the usage but it would be used for close up and distant, fast moving and slow, outdoors, in sunshine and in rain, at daytime, with a clear view and behind safety fencing.
hmmm that didn't help much

Thanks for replies, off to read some more reviews then to try out in shop. Still none the wiser

OK. Well in that case, as the aperture range is basically the same, and the IQ is similar (apart from vignetting), there is nothing to choose between them in those areas. The 4 stop IS on the 55-250 will be pretty much irrelevant for sport. I doubt you will be shooting much sport at 250mm and at 4 stops down from the recommended hand held minimum shutter speed, which would be 1/25 so ignore that.

The 70-300 is an EF lens, which means it will also work if you ever go up to a larger format. Of course, if you're using a 5D or a 1 series body then you'll probably have the budget and the needs for something better than both these lenses. The EF build also means that your crop body should be using the sweet spoot of the lens and vignetting etc. should be non existent on your cropper. The 55-250, on the other hand, is EF-S which means it will not fit a larger format body and, as the Photozone review comments, vignetting is evident at the wide end. That gives another win to the 70-300, making it 1-0 to the longer lens.

That leaves AF performance, focal length range and price.

You already have the wide end covered, and for a lot of sport, it's generally more likely you'll want extra reach, all other things being equal, so that makes it 2-0 to the 70-300. That said, there is probably not a massive difference between 250mm and 300mm in terms of the final image, but every little helps.

Then there is the AF performance. I don't have either lens but the reviews I've read favour the 70-300. For sport, AF performance could be the difference between getting a useable image or junk. Whether ther is enough difference between the two to really matter I don't know, but, as with focal length, every little helps. So that's 3-0 for the 70-300.

Where the 55-300 does score is on weight and size, being EF-S, and it's a good deal cheaper. Weight and size may or may not be an issue for you but I'm sure price is an important factor, so score a win to the 55-250. I make that 3-1 to the 70-300 overall.

So, on balance, if you can afford it, go for the 70-300. If the money is a concern then go for the 55-200. It probably does offer better value for money, so long as it gives you images you will be happy with. I'm sure either lens will serve you well.

One issue I believe that applies to the 70-300 (I don't know about the 55-250) is that the front element rotates when focusing. If you use a circular polariser this could be irritating. But it's a problem that may apply equally to the 55-250.

[loz]

This might be a useful review of the 55-250 as it directly compares it against the 70-300 and also the 70-200 F4 as another point of reference.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

I bought the 55-250 instead of the 70-300 as I wanted a smaller, lighter lens that I could easily take with me on days out.

I have been very pleased with the results

Here's some of my pics with the 450D + 55-250mm
http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=2106...5-250mm&m=text

Can't ask for much better than this. Click for a larger version

[ColdKilla]

Has anyone bought one of these off ebay out of interest?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-CANON-EF-7...6.c0.m14.l1308

[CallMeSteve]

I just got my 55-250mm and for the money you definitely can't go wrong. I haven't tested it thoroughly yet but initial impressions are . I didn't really need the 300mm reach and also with the 55-250mm partnered with the kit lens I have most of the focal range covered.

[morleymackam]

I've just got the 55-250 IS and love it. I took it to DTM at Nurburgring and the shots were pin sharp at 250mm whereas most tail off at the long end.