Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I have a 75-300 lens, and it's not the best lens, but it's worth it to get that distance that you just can't reach with shorter lenses.

k, but there are a lot of 75-300 lens' to choose from several between 150 and 200, and some that are a lot more, of the sub 200 dollar ones which is best?
 
The Sigma 75-300 gets good reviews. I've been satisfied with it. As with most lenses, avoid the extremes and don't open it up fully unless you have to. It's on Amazon now for $196.
 
I would avoid the Canon 75-300 f/4 - 5.6. Save up for a better telephoto. I have one as it came with the twin lens kit and I do not like the lens. I only use it for times when I really need a telephoto lens. Generally the photos a really soft and you need to manually focus to the general area you want to focus before the autofocus will kick in properly.
 
Yeah, I'd agree with M@lew- the 75-300 is crap. I got one for free with my 5D (silly Costco), used it for a week, and then practically gave it away to a friend who is learning. The cheapest decent zoom you can get is the 70-300 for about $550, but at that price you can get a 70-200 f/4 L.
 
I'm in the same boat - I'm planning to get the Canon 10-22mm for the wide end, but I've been looking at the various cheap 70/75-300 zooms for a telephoto - I've heard that they are soft beyond 200mm but OK under that...

The 70-200 f/4L looks like a very nice lens - squeeks, if you are willing to spend the money I'd recommend this one. It will be worth it in the long run, I think.
 
Keh has an ultrasonic Canon 70-210 F3.5-4.5 in excellent condition for $265.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.