03-17-2013 01:54 PM
Hi, i have a canon rebel t3 and i want a telephoto lens , but i don't know which lens to take between Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM and Canon EF-S IS 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II, I generally like to shoot street, abstract and nature photos and I'm not sure which lens is going to be more suitable to my needs...
03-17-2013 02:39 PM
The 55-250 has an image stabilizer which is a big help in just about anyones book when shooting hand held. However the 70-200 f4 L without IS is a better lens but may not be long enough some of the time but it can be used with a 1.4 Teleconverter. Budget may dictate which is the better fit for you but whenever possible go for the best lens you can afford in the range you want covered. .
03-18-2013 08:58 AM
The focal length difference between 300mm and 250mm and USM is the main advantage of the 75-300. But the 55-250 has IS.
The 250 was my second lens and was my most used lens for a long time. When I did want more focal length, I wanted more than the additional 50mm. It wasn't until I got a the 100-400 did I semi-reture the 55-250mm. It was the best $150 I spent for photography.
03-18-2013 10:57 AM
If the choice is between the 75-300mm and the 55-250mm, the hands down choice is the 55-250mm.
My free advice and worth every penny!
03-19-2013 02:39 AM
03-21-2013 05:50 PM - edited 03-21-2013 05:57 PM
Vasanthkumar and Sami:
There are actually 3 lenses that are pretty similar in range and price: the 55-250, the 70-300 and the 75-300. Of the 3, the 75-300 is rated poorest quality.
Here is a tool that lets you compare image quality between 2 lenses. You can even see them at different lengths and at different apertures.
And here are reviews of all 3 lenses:
Among the 3, I would choose the 70-300 IS. It has Image Stabilization, and for the price it really has good image quality.
My 2nd choice would be the 55-250 IS. Same reasons as above. I actually owned this lens for a while, and it was indeed capable of taking a sharp picture.
I personally would not go with the 75-300. No IS, for one thing. More importantly, it is not very sharp according to reviews. The small price savings vs. the 2 better lenses would not be worth it to me if all my photos suffered noticably.
To quote the review above on this lens, "If you care about great image quality and sharp photos, the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens is not for you. And Photoshop cannot enhance details that are not there."
03-21-2013 07:03 PM
I Like this
"If you care about great image quality and sharp photos, the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens is not for you. And Photoshop cannot enhance details that are not there."
And I think it's price point suggests that too.
03-21-2013 07:10 PM
Sami, there are some exceptions to that rule but in general they have high prices. I've used several Superzooms since going digital & although they aren't perfect they can do well with good technique & by avoiding shooting wide open whenever possible. The pro level (L series in Canon's case) can deliver much better results than the consumer grade lenses but they also cost considerably more BUT there's also a learning curve to shooting ANY long lens. I get great results with the older 35-350 L & the current 28-300 L IS & if I didn't own those I'd buy the 70-300 L IS based on it's reviews & user comments.