Canon 55-250mm IS or 70-300mm IS USM

Fla5h

Fla5h

Messages
832
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
Looking at swapping my 55-250mm IS mk I for the 70-300mm IS USM

Is it worth the extra £200 odd outlay?

Was also looking at the 70-200mm L f/4.0 USM but price wise going to be a little bit of a stretch plus I already have the older 70-210mm f/4.0

TIA
 
What do you tend to use it for? The L has great AF but might be unsuitable if you need the reach. Why not sell the 70-210 to help fund the upgrade, you should get around £100 for it on a good day.
 
Fla5h said:
Looking at swapping my 55-250mm IS mk I for the 70-300mm IS USM

Is it worth the extra £200 odd outlay?

Was also looking at the 70-200mm L f/4.0 USM but price wise going to be a little bit of a stretch plus I already have the older 70-210mm f/4.0

TIA
Click to expand...

I have had the 70-300 and didn't like it I was constantly disappointment in the sharpness especially at 250-300. I actually sold my 70-200L f4 to fund that and a 24-105 L f4 Still have the 24-105l and have now sold the 70-300 and bought another 70-200l :) Hope you can make some sense of that :lol:

Depending on what reach you need I would sell the 70-210 and the 55-250 and buy a 70-200l you wont regret it.
 
Widlife and portraits really but I do have the 50mm f/1.8 for portraits

The reach was really to get a bit closer on the nature shots but I got fairly close to the action with my 70-210mm the other day

I'll have a good think about the 70-200mm f/4 but will just have to do without IS I guess
 
From what I've read the 50-250 is a good value lens. The main advantage of the 70-300 seems to be the full frame compatability. I think that's the reason it's more expensive, not image quality. I could be wrong.

You may find that due to the sharpness of the L lens, you will be able to get more detail even though it's 50mm shorter in focal length.

It's always worth thinking about the resale value of any lenses you buy. If you bought the L second hand for a reasonable price then you'd be unlucky to lose more than £30 on it in a year or twos time.
 
whom said:
From what I've read the 50-250 is a good value lens. The main advantage of the 70-300 seems to be the full frame compatability. I think that's the reason it's more expensive, not image quality. I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

That, USM and better build quality seem to be the main reasons to me.
 
Fair enough. It's only a micro motor usm though isn't it? I guess it's a fair bit heavier than the 50-250 to go with the full frame and build quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top