Canon 55-250 IS- Excellent for the cost.

[MARINERMAGNUM]

After reading many favorable comments on this lens I grabbed one.

Not sure how Canon can do it for around $250

Very good image quality,no C.A. (purple fringing) I believe this lens sports a UD element-hence the no purple fringing.

The I.S. is so much quieter than my 100-400 it isn't funny.

If you are shooting outdoors,this "cheap" telephoto will give alot of more expensive rigs a run for their money.

Don't even consider a new 70-300 IS-I had one and this lens is half the price,better/quieter IS,faster focus,and feels tighter,and produces way better images.

This is the very 1st shot I took with it,on an "old" Canon 20D

[1luckydad]

Sure. I was looking at the 70-300 IS. Now I have to do some more looking and thinking?? The 55-250 IS is much cheaper, which means it would be on my camera sooner. They do say the best lens is the one you have. Not one you want or are waiting to get! Any one else have any thoughts? Is the extra reach worth the extra money? I think buying a new vehicle is easier then buying a lens.

[MARINERMAGNUM]

The 70-300 IS has been made obsolete in my eyes after using the 55-250.

I have plenty of "L" series lenses,but they are becoming a pain to lug around.

The 55-250 is very light lens that produces very good image quality.

If you get to know how to use your camera,and understand the correct exposure for each situation,you will do better work with this lens than someone with a $2000 lens who is less familiar with what exposure is correct for a given situation.

The 70-300 IS softens up at 300mm anyway,so don't worry about the reach.

As with any lower price lens,the drawbacks are-slower aperture,not water resistant,not particularly a rock solid build.

[Hwood]

I have the 70-300. It may as well read 70-200.

[1luckydad]

Well that settles it. The 55-250 is the winner. I would love to buy an L lens, but I have to wait for my wife to catch the fever before that will happen. I caught the fever when I took a photography class in high school 30 years ago.Back when we had to spend time in the dark room before you could see if you had a good picture.

[wishing for walleyes]

MARINERMAGNUM If you had a choice between your 100-400 or your 55-250 which one would you choose? Just curious.

[MARINERMAGNUM]

MARINERMAGNUM If you had a choice between your 100-400 or your 55-250 which one would you choose? Just curious.

Really depends on the situation.

I have had 3 100-400's and the 55-250 is sharper than 2 of them.

Aperture speed is the same for both. The IS is better on the 250. Color/contrast is a toss up.

If I know I'm going to get relatively close,I'd take the 250 hands down. At 400 mm you have more reach, but that still works against you making a sharp image.

If you need a fast apertue for indoor sports, weddings this lens won't cut it, but for sharpness and color rendition it runs neck and neck with my $1600 70-200.

I'll try to get some good quality shots this weekend with it and post them.

[wishing for walleyes]

The reviews are awesome on this lens.I found one on the big auction site brand new shipped for $217.Cant wait to get it.

[MARINERMAGNUM]

Wishing, what camera will it go on? Rebel, etc?

[wishing for walleyes]

A rebel T1i

[wishing for walleyes]

Got the new lens and really like it.Here's a couple of shots taken at 250mm.