Canon 55-250mm lens woth buying?

blockburner28

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 27, 2009
361
0
New Orleans
btw this is the IS version. I just notice bestbuy was offering this in a t1i bundle for 200 dollars more. Is the picture quality of this lens worth paying 200 dollars for? Also would it be better for me to get the nikon d90 with the 18-105 kit lens? or just keep my camera and go with this lens. Thanks in advance guys.
 

AlaskaMoose

macrumors 68000
Apr 26, 2008
1,519
891
Alaska
btw this is the IS version. I just notice bestbuy was offering this in a t1i bundle for 200 dollars more. Is the picture quality of this lens worth paying 200 dollars for? Thanks in advance guys.
In my opinion, unless you need IS for lowlight photography, the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM (no IS) is a better deal, and costs around $600.00.
 

Abyssgh0st

macrumors 68000
Jan 12, 2009
1,885
3
Colorado
It is a very nice starter telephoto, until you want to move into the 70-200mm family. I own one and have gotten pretty stellar shots with it, worth $200 to say the least.
 

blockburner28

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 27, 2009
361
0
New Orleans
In my opinion, unless you need IS for lowlight photography, the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM (no IS) is a better deal, and costs around $600.00.
Thanks, I will need IS for low light.

It is a very nice starter telephoto, until you want to move into the 70-200mm family. I own one and have gotten pretty stellar shots with it, worth $200 to say the least.
thanks! I wanted to ask would it be better for me to get the nikon d90 with the 18-105 lens? or just keep my camera and go with lens
 

Abyssgh0st

macrumors 68000
Jan 12, 2009
1,885
3
Colorado
I think you'll be happier in the long run having two lenses; you'll have 18-250 covered with the Canon setup rather than the 18-105 with Nikon, and that's a big difference.
 

Gold89

macrumors 6502
Dec 17, 2008
263
0
UK
Just to add to the comments the 55-250mm IS is a fantastic value for money lens and the best of the longer budget lenses. I'm very pleased with mine, good choice :)
 

HBOC

macrumors 68020
Oct 14, 2008
2,494
234
SLC
I really like mine. It gets raving reviews. Has nice bokeh as well, especially for the price.
 

Patriks7

macrumors 65816
Oct 26, 2008
1,285
282
Vienna
For the price, it really is worth it. You would do best by ignoring all those telling you to buy a 70-200, because you don't know what focal length you need. Say you get the 55-250 now and after using it for a couple months, you find out it is too short for your use. What use would the 70-200 be in that case?
Like I said, the 55-250 is a really great lens for it's price, that's why some called in the "Nifty 250".
 

blockburner28

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 27, 2009
361
0
New Orleans
For the price, it really is worth it. You would do best by ignoring all those telling you to buy a 70-200, because you don't know what focal length you need. Say you get the 55-250 now and after using it for a couple months, you find out it is too short for your use. What use would the 70-200 be in that case?
Like I said, the 55-250 is a really great lens for it's price, that's why some called in the "Nifty 250".
Thanks for all the information man I went picked up the 55-250mm from bestbuy. I got lucky and got it for 195 including tax. I also had a 35 dollar gift certificate from best buy reward program so I only paid $157 out the pocket. Man I love bestbuy! btw what's so up with the saying "Nifty"? I know I heard about the nifty 50 which I will be getting soon
 

Gold89

macrumors 6502
Dec 17, 2008
263
0
UK
Thanks for all the information man I went picked up the 55-250mm from bestbuy. I got lucky and got it for 195 including tax. I also had a 35 dollar gift certificate from best buy reward program so I only paid $157 out the pocket. Man I love bestbuy! btw what's so up with the saying "Nifty"? I know I heard about the nifty 50 which I will be getting soon
Nifty fifty was just a nickname for the 50mm f1.8 which was so cheap and had the potential for great image quality (if slightly stopped down) with the wide aperture. Nifty two fifty just sounds similar and is the probably the second best value lens in the Canon range (along with some copies of the 18-55mm IS). :)
 

blockburner28

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 27, 2009
361
0
New Orleans
+1 on the 50-250mm kit IS, I'm still using mine 5 months into owning it.
Great starter lens, have fun with it.
Clickable:
I love the pictures man. You just sealed the deal for me! I love this lens :D I can't wait til I get a chance to go on a Swamp Tour down here in New Orleans to try this lens out. Thanks guys for all the information yall gave me
 

bearcatrp

macrumors 68000
Sep 24, 2008
1,603
3
Boon Docks USA
+1 on the 50-250mm kit IS, I'm still using mine 5 months into owning it.
Great starter lens, have fun with it.
Clickable:
Like the moon shot. Hopefully getting a D7 or the t2i with a strong mega zoom lens for night sky shooting. Anyone using the 70-300IS? This is the lens I am concidering.
 

Gold89

macrumors 6502
Dec 17, 2008
263
0
UK
Like the moon shot. Hopefully getting a D7 or the t2i with a strong mega zoom lens for night sky shooting. Anyone using the 70-300IS? This is the lens I am concidering.
There's no point investing in a body for sky shooting, it's an expensive interest and 300mm isn't really long enough. There's plenty of information out there about it.
 

Patriks7

macrumors 65816
Oct 26, 2008
1,285
282
Vienna
Like the moon shot. Hopefully getting a D7 or the t2i with a strong mega zoom lens for night sky shooting. Anyone using the 70-300IS? This is the lens I am concidering.
There's no point investing in a body for sky shooting, it's an expensive interest and 300mm isn't really long enough. There's plenty of information out there about it.
What that guy above said. The 70-300IS isn't really a "strong mega zoom lens". You'd be much better off getting a cheaper body and something like a sigma (1)50-500, but that still would be short.
 

mtbdudex

macrumors 68000
Aug 28, 2007
1,776
131
SE Michigan
I agree, there is always someone with a bigger lens, a telescope/dslr set-up, tracking, etc.
At some point you have to say "This is the equipment I have, and I will work with it and be content until I've maxed those experiences".
If not, you will always be "chasing" instead of "experiencing" IMO.
(took me 48 years to realize that btw)

With that in mind for 2010 I'm working on this list that uses my existing equipment (T1i, 18-50/50-250 kit lens, tripod, remote).
My Top 10 in 2010 to shoot (Astronomy, non telescope)
1. Full Moon; zoom lens
2. Moon at various Phases; put 7-9 images into photo collage
3. Lunar X; zoom lens
4. Moon illuminated by Earthlight ; zoom lens
5. Creative moon shots; Moonrise over lake /clouds; wide lens
6. total lunar eclipse Dec 20/21 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decembe..._lunar_eclipse
7. ISS, Space Shuttle, Iridium Flares ;wide lens, long exposures; try zoom on ISS
8. Star Trails ; wide lens, long exposures, stacking
9. Milky Way/Orion ; wide lens, long exposures, stacking
10. Meteor Showers; Lyrids Apr 22, Perseids Aug 12/13, Geminids 12/14; wide lens; long exposures, stacking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_shower
 

VirtualRain

macrumors 603
Aug 1, 2008
6,304
114
Vancouver, BC
What that guy above said. The 70-300IS isn't really a "strong mega zoom lens". You'd be much better off getting a cheaper body and something like a sigma (1)50-500, but that still would be short.
For astronomy, I suspect you'd be much better off with a mid-line telescope and a DSLR adapter than some huge lens. You can get some fairly decent telescopes for well under $1000 that will track celestial objects at 1000-1200mm focal length and produce stunning images.
 

Full of Win

macrumors 68030
Nov 22, 2007
2,615
1
Ask Apple
Last year these were free with an XSi purchase.

For the price, its great. However, it does have a lack of contrast that you may notice. Moreover, it becomes progressively slower as you zoom in; making it near useless in many indoor situations with weak lighting. It also vignettes noticeably. With these points; many can be dealt with in post processing. Color can be boosted, vignetting reduced, and so on.

If you are getting it to have a telephoto ability, and not expecting the world indoors, then its great. However, if you looking to make telephoto an integral part of your photography, such as Sports Photography, then this should be skipped.

All IMHO, as an owner of this lens
 

blockburner28

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 27, 2009
361
0
New Orleans
Last year these were free with an XSi purchase.

For the price, its great. However, it does have a lack of contrast that you may notice. Moreover, it becomes progressively slower as you zoom in; making it near useless in many indoor situations with weak lighting. It also vignettes noticeably. With these points; many can be dealt with in post processing. Color can be boosted, vignetting reduced, and so on.

If you are getting it to have a telephoto ability, and not expecting the world indoors, then its great. However, if you looking to make telephoto an integral part of your photography, such as Sports Photography, then this should be skipped.

All IMHO, as an owner of this lens
I just found this out today lol. I couldn't shoot inside for nothing.
 

Full of Win

macrumors 68030
Nov 22, 2007
2,615
1
Ask Apple

mtbdudex

macrumors 68000
Aug 28, 2007
1,776
131
SE Michigan
Hopefully I did not mislead you, as stated it's indoor ability is limited, however you can get shots.

What camera settings did you use? Don't give up just yet.

These were all indoor my kids 1st day of winter swim lessons (Jan-2010), poor lighting at the best.
I took test shots and decided I needed to use ISO800 and speed of 1/30 if not moving subject and 1/60 if moving. Sure a little grainy but it can capture the moment. No flash used.
Clickable:
Fwiw, the 70-200 2.8 "L" IS II is on my docket as future lens....maybe 1 year from now, $2k is a lot.