Worth while?

katieh

I currently have 2 Canon EF-S 55-250 1:4-5:6 IS lenses.

My husband sent me a link to a Canon EF 75-300 Ultrasonic II 1:4-5:6 lens.

Would it be worth it to buy this new lens my husband sent me the link to? I'm really new to this whole upgrading lenses thing. I know that I need to get into L glass, but currently, it's just not in the budget. This new lens is on eBay and is currently sitting at a bid of $5.50 with 2 days left to go. What would your top dollar be for this lens if I were to get it?

Also, what is the difference between the 75-300 lens and the 55-250 I currently have (other than the zoom aspect).

Help! Thanks much.

katieh

Oh and I forgot to mention that the new lens I'm talking about also comes with an ET-60 lens hood.

ziggy53

For a crop Canon camera the Canon EF 75-300 Ultrasonic II 1:4-5:6 is a step down from what you have already. For a longer zoom with better quality you might keep keep an eye out for a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. The 70-300mm IS is in another league above the 75-300mm. It's not quite "L" quality from either an image quality or build quality perspective but it would be potentially better than the EF-S 55-250mm IS lenses that you have, although mostly only better in build quality. (What you have is really an excellent value zoom.)

Yes, eventually you would benefit from an EF 70-200mm, f4L USM and adding an EF 1.4x teleconverter as needed. The non-IS version of that lens is among the least expensive of the Canon "L" lenses but provides excellent image quality. Occasionally you will see then go for very reasonable prices because people generally want the "IS" version much more.

ThatCanonGuy

What Ziggy said. Your 55-250 is optically better than the 75-300. Why would you buy the 75-300? What do you need that it would give you? I assume the answer is 300mm. Well, that 75-300 is not very good optically, and it's at its worst at 300mm. So if you want 300mm, the 75-300 is not a good choice.

If you do in fact want 300mm, the 70-300 IS is a good lens. But on the used market, it goes for around $400. For just $100 more, you could get a used 70-200 f4L with all that L goodness . Add a 1.4x TC for $200, and you have 280mm, pretty close to 300.

If you can't afford that right now, a very capable alternative is the 100-300 USM. I have owned two, and while the image quality doesn't match my L, it's excellent for the price. Usually $150 used (check ebay or KEH.com). It has fast ring-type USM (you being a 55-250 user probably don't know what that is, but you'll love it!). Not as good as the 70-200L's AF, but pretty close.

Your 3 best options are: 100-300 for around $150, 70-300 IS for around $400, or 70-200 f4L + 1.4x TC for $700 total. I'd say get whatever you can afford. The 100-300 has ring-type USM, while the 70-300 IS doesn't. However, the 70-300 has IS, while the 100-300 doesn't. Do you find yourself using the IS on your current 55-250 much? Is it useful? If so, then the 70-300 might be the better option.

katieh

Thanks for the advice folks. I really like having IS. I have IS on all of my current lenses and use it quite often as we do a lot of automotive and automotive racing photography. I absolutely despise using a tripod, so the IS is always great to help a bit with the steady hand problem. I will keep on the look out for the above mentioned lenses and see what I can come across in my price range. Thanks again.