Christian and Beccy

iTrader: (14)

I've got my Canon EOS 400D with the 18-55 lens that it came with. Been playing around with some stuff, but LOTS to learn yet.

We are going on holiday in a couple of months and I want to get another lens. I really don't want to get into spending fortunes, but want to be able to photograph things that are further away, am I looking at the right kinds of lens?

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS ......

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Prod...6_IS/index.asp

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM......

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Prod..._USM/index.asp

Both are Image Stabilised lenses and the 70-300 is significantly more expensive, so obviously I would rather buy the 55-250 unless there is a very significant reason why I should buy the 70-300 and that I would appreciate the difference at my level of experience (and for the forseeable future).

I want to have more versatility when we are on Holiday, but would like to a lens that is more suited to photographing trackdays etc too and I remember Adrian saying that he uses a Tamron 70-300 for this. I do fancy the Image Stabilisation though and I can find the 55-250 for around £170.

So, whats the story?

richm

take a serious look at the Tamron Di (or maybe Di mkII now) series lenses, the ones I've seen are equal to or better than the equivalent Canon lenses (except L-series lol) in sharpness and contrast.

Graceland

I might have a Canon USM 55-200 lens + Polarizing and UV filter + Hood going soon if you're interested - used it a couple of times on my 400d with some great results (All the photies of my E39 were done at night with this lens)

Also if you are looking at other brands, Tamron are the dogs swinging bits - Superb bits of kit

Christian and Beccy

iTrader: (14)

Main reason for looking at Canon was the Image Stabilisation. Is it worth pinning my hopes on it?

Adrian

Paul (Graceland) recommended this one to me.

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/?sku=1013817

Suits me down to the ground. Cant fault it. £115 from the above.

All these were taken with said lens at Snetterton on the 1.3.08. Windy and freezing me knackers off taking them.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/adebarb...57604057390820

Christian and Beccy

iTrader: (14)

OK, thats fine, but I'm not going to stop droning on about IS until someone says it's not worth having......

pa_sjo

IS will create better pictures because.. the lenses above are fairly 'slow', which means you'll need a steady hand in anything other than daylight.. the image stabilisation helps this somewhat, kinda saving you the need to buy a 'fast' lens (eg, a f/2.8 or bigger).. Personally i'd get something like a Sigma/Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 (about £400-500 from China) as it'd most likely cover most things you're likely to do (with your kit lens too).

Muska

I would stick with the IS at that focal length really, you have to imagine that every small movement your hands make will be exagerated at the longer focal lengths and if you want to be shooting motorsport then you'll be using something like 1/125th for shutter speeds and the last thing you want is all your pictures ruined because of camera shake.

As for lens recomendation i can't really speak for the Canon lenses as i've no experience with them. Try typing the name of the lens into google and just add 'review' to the end and you'll be surprised how many come up. It might aid your decision process as they often compare similar lenses.

hope that helps somewhat.

Matt.

frog

It's worth having on an overcast motorsports or stadium day, and indoors. On a sunny summer's day, you probably won't really have a need for it By that I mean that the amount of light on a sunny day will be sufficient for you to select a speed which will prevent shake making IS pointless.

TBH, 250 or 300 won't make that much of a difference trackside, your MP count is high enough that you can crop without loosing much image quality.

Out of the two, I'd choose the better lens in terms of quality, etc... than either based on IS or 300mm

HTH

frog

1/125th for panning shots - IS would help a little, but considering the lens/camera is moving, I am not sure IS would be up to keeping things in check

Muska

Sorry, busy night last night and brain not fully functioning yet!

Mr Frog is right that it would hardly make any difference (if at all) for panning shots. I'd still consider the IS to be something i'd want though as we don't get that many sunny days in England!

The general rule of thumb is to use a shutter speed no lower than the max focal length of the lens you're using to retain clear pictures (does not apply to panning shots as such.)

Matt.