Canon 450D and 55-250 IS Lens advice please

W

wellyboot

Messages
991
Name
Marcia
Edit My Images
No
I wonder could anyone help me?
I currently have a Sony A300 and was thinking of upgrading to an A700, but whilst in Jessops a 450D caught my eye, and it felt very good in the hand.
I also looked at lenses for it while I was there, and although I had my eye on the 70-300 IS USM, I really think I could only afford the 55-250 IS.
My question is has anyone used this lens, and what is it like at the 250 end?
I currently use a Sigma 70-300 DG APO, but with RA I definitely need some form of IS.
I mostly take images of wildlife (particularly birds, and dragonflies), and less often landscapes and dogs!!
Also what are peoples thoughts on the 450D compared to the Sony for my purposes?
Thanks in advance for the advice!
 
I use the 55-250. For the price you can't grumble. It gets a little soft at full reach but backed off a bit 200-220mm it's pretty sharp :)
 
Thinking along the same lines, I have a 450D and a Sigma 70-300 DG APO Macro, but looking seriously at the Canon 55-250 IS, cheapest I've seen is £199.00 from Park Cameras, think this will be my next purchase, but I will keep the Sigma.
 
55-250 is really in a class of it's own for £200. If that's your budget, look no further.

The 70-300 IS is better, an all round class act, plus it's longer and better built, but twice the price.
 
I have the 55-250 as well, as people have said for the money its probably the best zoom out there.
The green ring 70-300 DO lens is probably better, but getting on for twice the price.

If you look on POTN they have a thread for pretty much each lens with plenty of example shots in, worth a look just to satisfy yourself.
 
I have the 55-250 and it's my most used lens. I use it for telephoto and macro work (with a Raynox DCR250) it lives on the camera.
 
Thank you everyone for your quick replies and advice - very much appreciated!
And thank you to Bagger for the link to your images, shot with the exact combo I'm thinking of!
All very, very helpful :)
 
I've heard very mixed reviews about the 70-300 DO. however the size is handy for some toggers.

the 70-300 IS is nice I think but not too cheap and not good for macro, something the sigma 70-300 does pretty well I think
 
Cracking photo's bagger. Would you say the 55-250 has the same image quality as the 18-55 just with longer range?
 
scottduffy said:
Cracking photo's bagger. Would you say the 55-250 has the same image quality as the 18-55 just with longer range?
Click to expand...

Its a good compliment to the 18-55 IS. The MTF resolution drops the longer the focal length as it does with any zoom, but is still very good, touching into excellent.
Optically its easily as good if not better than the 70-300 IS USM ( according to all the reviews ive read ).
The only thing that lets it down is the lack of USM and is a little plasticy, but what do you expect for 175 quids. If you get one you wont be disappointed.
 
scottduffy said:
Would you say the 55-250 has the same image quality as the 18-55 just with longer range?
Click to expand...

IMO the the 55-250 gives better results than the 18-55. It's in a different league in terms of sharpness. I've replaced the 18-55 with the Tamron 17-50 which compliments the 55-250 better over the entire range :)
 
Thank you again everyone - I'm almost convinced as long as I can find some bargains!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top