zoom lenses (18-200/55-250mm) for canon

M

mattsnoise

Messages
60
Name
Matthew
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi everyone, I'm looking to invest in a new lens that will give me more zoom than I currently have with the stock lens on my 1000D (18-55 IS).

I am looking at the expensive Canon one which is 18-200mm and classed as a 'walkabout' lens which would seem to fit the bill as I don't really want to have to swap back to my current lens every time I want to get a wide shot at the 18mm end, however, this size seems to be very expensive because it fills that gap in the market or something of the sort.

Therefore I've done a bit of looking and have found the 55-250mm lenses which are half the price of the 18-200mm ones. This has led me to accept that if I need a wider shot, I will have to swap lenses, in the grand scheme of things, this does not bother me if it saves me a couple of hundred quid.

So then comes to the matter of do I get a new one with wonderful IS built in, or do I get a used one which may not have IS on but would be half the price again???

I have IS on my current lens and can't say that I notice a difference when it is on or off (I have experimented with it!) and so how desperate is it that I get IS on a lens that could be up to 250mm long?

Any help/guidance is greatly appreciated!
 
55mm isn't really long enough to appreciate IS in most conditions but at 200mm it is dead handy.
 
I own a 1000d which came with the 18-55 non IS and i bought the 55-250mm IS to get some extra reach, personally i find the IS very useful especially at long focal lengths but I have noticed a good improvement in low light even in my 18-55IS which i bought recently as it was going cheap.
Altough i dont have experience with the more expensive lenses from what ive read the 55-250's IQ is supposed to be comparable to some of the more expensive lenses, I cant fault the lens myself.
 
I am afraid that I wont be very fair on making this choice, because personally I love using a lot of kit, switching lenses, and all of that business. I actually own the 55mm - 250mm IS and it is a really good lens for the price. Good sharpness, nice versatility and good AF. But the best part of it is - The Image Stabilisation is absolutely fantastic. It is so usable, that it really does help. I love it. My dad actually owns the 18-200mm and I also like it. Of course it gives more of a range, however on the other hand, its missing that 50mm from the high end (250mm on the other one). Its also got a better build quality, with a metal mount and also has IS (not as good I find, but still gives about 2~3 stops).

Personally I think that I would go for the 55-250mm IS simply because it is cheaper and better value for money. But then again - its up to your personal needs and preferences.

All the best in making your choice!
 
I'd say get the 55-250 lens, it mates nicely with the kit lens length and the IS is well worth it.
 
Mainly use shorter focal lengths, but for the odd occasional use I bought a 55-250 with hood and filter off a mate for 120 quid.

Got to say how pleasantly surprised I am with the image quality and the IS works well too.
Don't be put off by the plastic mount, great lens for the money and has the added bonus of being lightweight too
 
Don't dismiss the Tamron 18-270VC (VC = IS), go and have a play with one.
Here is a review : http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_18-270_3p5-6p3_vc_n15/
I don't agree with what they''ve said about the VC being a bit slow for moving objects, I got some decent shots of my dog running with the VC switched on.
I've owned the Canon 55-250mm the Tamron, the IQ with both lenses is about the same.
All superzooms have their pros and cons but for a general walkabout lens, the Tamron is good choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top