Canon Lenses

tomwazza

tomwazza

Messages
62
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
Afternoon,

After toying with the idea of buying an SLR for a few months I decided to get a Canon 30D the other week off eBay. I bought it with a kit lens that seems to work quite nicely (accept for it being non-IS and a little 'clunky'), nonetheless I'm yearning for a little more zoom (I’d love to go to classic car hill climbs and get some shots). After a little research I came across this...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-55-250mm-Telephoto-Selected-Digital/dp/B000V9D5LG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1261573374&sr=8-1

It seems rather cheap, I've googled it and the price seems to be fairly similar everywhere I’ve checked. Just wondering if there is anything I'm missing...

As always your combined advice and suggestions are greatly welcome.

Thanks,

Tom.
 
Not a bad lens at the price
 
It's one of Canon's entry level lenses. No catch with it, and they are great value for money. Just don't expect it to be the sharpest lens ever and you'll be fine!

If you can live without IS then this would be a good lens to consider: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 APO. I use one and it's great for the money! Warehouse Express are out of stock atm but plenty of other people sell them....
 
it's an understated lens - i have one and it's pretty good.

i took this at full zoom with mine:
4139503986_065491859d.jpg
 
Cheers guys, will it be ok for motorsport type photos (if that makes sense lol)?

Thanks again,

Tom.
 
Not sure as i'm not sure how quick it takes to focus, i'm guessing its quite slow
 
it's slow in dim light, definately.
 
Hi,

I have this lens for my 400d and although I am quite happy with it I wouldn't suggest using it for bird and long distance wildlife photography, or fast sports. The IS seems to work quite well. I got it as a general zoom for the holiday i had in Skye this year and it worked well, despite my initial inability to use it properly :)



and this one...
http://morbidorbits.deviantart.com/art/transmission-131690927
 
You won't get anything better for that money.

Next up will be either the Canon 70-300mm IS USM or if you buy used either a Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 or the Canon 70-200mm F4L - but you are pushing the budget to £400 or therabouts for those three
 
And do think hard about upgrading the kit lens if it isn't the IS version as it's, quite frankly, crap.
 
The23rdman said:
And do think hard about upgrading the kit lens if it isn't the IS version as it's, quite frankly, crap.
Click to expand...

I agree! I went straight for the 17-40L as my first ever lens and it has been worth every penny, I love it! The 55-250 is nowhere near the same solid build quality but it is a great and lightweight little lens!
 
It's a great lens for the money, and lives on my camera... Here's a couple of my motorsport shots from goodwood this year with it.

IMG_7219.jpg


IMG_6463.jpg


IMG_6476.jpg


The IS is superb
 
John, they're impressive shots! I have no real interest in sport photography so I didn't want to suggest it would be suitable, but you have shown it clearly is.
 
tomwazza said:
I’d love to go to classic car hill climbs and get some shots
Click to expand...

Looking at your location I'm guessing Prescott Hill climb?

It's a great circuit for getting close to the cars and depending on where you go you can use anything from a wide angle to a long telephoto.

If you can push a bit more the 70-300 IS is supposed to be reasonable, or more again gets you the 70-200 f4 L. Always worth checking the secondhand market as well, such as MPB.
http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/used-equipment/used-lenses/used-canon-fit-lenses/?viewall=1
 
The 55-250 gets really good reviews! The only thing to bear in mind is that if you're thinking about upgrading to full-frame in the future, it won't be compatible.

When I was choosing, I went for the 70-300 IS USM in the end as I got it got a good price, and I wanted the faster, silent focussing and the extra 50mm.

Both are great lenses, and I think you'd be happy whichever you chose! [shameless plug alert]If you do decide to go for the 70-300, mine is in the for sale section![end of shameless plug] :thumbs:
 
chris321 said:
The 55-250 gets really good reviews! The only thing to bear in mind is that if you're thinking about upgrading to full-frame in the future, it won't be compatible.

When I was choosing, I went for the 70-300 IS USM in the end as I got it got a good price, and I wanted the faster, silent focussing and the extra 50mm.

Both are great lenses, and I think you'd be happy whichever you chose! [shameless plug alert]If you do decide to go for the 70-300, mine is in the for sale section![end of shameless plug] :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Shame on you!!!:lol:
 
Its an absolutely brilliant lens and brilliant at capturing motorsport (or anything else for that matter).

Here are some I've taken with mine;

IMG_7271.jpg


IMG_5789.jpg


IMG_5982.jpg


IMG_2933.jpg


IMG_8026.jpg


...who said it couldnt be used for fast sports???! :) One of the most underrated telephoto's on the market IMO.
 
...who said it couldnt be used for fast sports???! :) One of the most underrated telephoto's on the market IMO.

err, that'll be me :( I didn't want to suggest using it for something that I hadn't tried. I was clearly wrong!
 
morbidorbits said:
John, they're impressive shots! I have no real interest in sport photography so I didn't want to suggest it would be suitable, but you have shown it clearly is.
Click to expand...

Cheers...

I've used mine for the moon, and birds (this is my only proper telephoto camera lens, telescopes are different beats), and it works, if you're prepared to crop with a chain saw instead of nail scissors...
 
recrudesce said:
it's slow in dim light, definately.
Click to expand...

No f4-5.6 - not exactly the kind of aperture for low light is it? ;)

It's not a bad lens, I owned one for a year and I really liked it.
It performed fine for me, the AF isn't too sloppy either.
As an entry level zoom, I don't think it can be beaten for the price.
 
hashcake said:
No f4-5.6 - not exactly the kind of aperture for low light is it? ;)

It's not a bad lens, I owned one for a year and I really liked it.
It performed fine for me, the AF isn't too sloppy either.
As an entry level zoom, I don't think it can be beaten for the price.
Click to expand...

i know, i was just saying !
 
I had the 55-250mm before I upgraded to the 300mm f/2.8 and it is a great little lens. I still kind of regret selling it, as it is certainly the best bang for buck lens along with the nifty fifty and 18-55mm IS.
 
Thanks everyone for all your comments, looking at the photos posted on here I think I'll be getting one of those very shortly :) I'm still getting used to the camera at the moment so I don't want to spend too much on lenses.

Byker28i - Yeh probably Prescott and Shelsley Walsh are the closest to me.

Jim + John - Those are exactly the kind of photos I'd be looking to try and take! Thanks for posting.

The23rdman - Yeh, it's not great. I'll probably replace it with a second hand one sometime next year. For the time being it will surfice (especially with the 55 - 250mm as a second lens)

Anyway cheers for all the comments, I'll probably be asking what all the buttons on the camera do next...













...only joking...

Tom.
 
micloi said:
I had one myself, lovely lens if 250mm is long enough for you.
If not then look at Sigma 70-300 APO or the Tamron 70-300 (on offer for 99 pounds at the moment)
Click to expand...

Sigma APO is the one to have IQ wise, the tamron isn't so clever, even if it is £99 at Jessops.......

However the IS on the Canon lenses is very good. I bought the Sigma for the extra 50mm but I nearly bought the said 55-250 IS....

Depends what reach you need/want!:shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top