I've decided to buy Canon EOS T3i and need lens help
Dec 16, 2011 15:49:34 #
nyweb2001 wrote:
The 75-300mm is perfect for me for birds and wildlife !
Thats what I'm hoping. I don't want to get too complicated this being my first real dslr.
Dec 16, 2011 16:02:55 #
mollymolly wrote:
My problem now is on the lens. The 2 options I have are the camera with 2 lens-8-55 mm and 55-250mm OR camera with 8-55mm and 75-300mm lens. Is there that much difference in the two telephoto lens?
Molly, That sounds like the same 2 kits I was tryin to decide between a few months back. If memory serves me correctly, I think the 75-300mm does not have IS... thats why I chose the 55-250..unless I was misinformed...
Dec 16, 2011 16:04:17 #
cheineck wrote:
The 18-55 is a pretty good kit lens, but I traded it for the EF-S 15-85... it's comparable to the "L" lens series in quality and sharpness... and it's a Macro lens. REALLY a great lens for the price, and you'll cover the 20mm gap also.
I never thought of a 15-85mm...I'll have to check into that !
Dec 16, 2011 16:05:38 #
puffman wrote:
Molly, That sounds like the same 2 kits I was tryin to decide between a few months back. If memory serves me correctly, I think the 75-300mm does not have IS... thats why I chose the 55-250..unless I was misinformed...
mollymolly wrote:
My problem now is on the lens. The 2 options I have are the camera with 2 lens-8-55 mm and 55-250mm OR camera with 8-55mm and 75-300mm lens. Is there that much difference in the two telephoto lens?
Molly, That sounds like the same 2 kits I was tryin to decide between a few months back. If memory serves me correctly, I think the 75-300mm does not have IS... thats why I chose the 55-250..unless I was misinformed...
Correct...the 75-300mm kit lens does NOT have IS....tripod all the way !
Dec 16, 2011 16:14:10 #
puffman wrote:
Molly, That sounds like the same 2 kits I was tryin to decide between a few months back. If memory serves me correctly, I think the 75-300mm does not have IS... thats why I chose the 55-250..unless I was misinformed...
mollymolly wrote:
My problem now is on the lens. The 2 options I have are the camera with 2 lens-8-55 mm and 55-250mm OR camera with 8-55mm and 75-300mm lens. Is there that much difference in the two telephoto lens?
Molly, That sounds like the same 2 kits I was tryin to decide between a few months back. If memory serves me correctly, I think the 75-300mm does not have IS... thats why I chose the 55-250..unless I was misinformed...
You are correct. I was pondering the same thing. I am led to believe that when you are using the 300mm, a tripod must be used, so not having IS is not a big issue. Am I wrong on this?
Dec 16, 2011 16:15:47 #
puffman wrote:
Molly, That sounds like the same 2 kits I was tryin to decide between a few months back. If memory serves me correctly, I think the 75-300mm does not have IS... thats why I chose the 55-250..unless I was misinformed...
mollymolly wrote:
My problem now is on the lens. The 2 options I have are the camera with 2 lens-8-55 mm and 55-250mm OR camera with 8-55mm and 75-300mm lens. Is there that much difference in the two telephoto lens?
Molly, That sounds like the same 2 kits I was tryin to decide between a few months back. If memory serves me correctly, I think the 75-300mm does not have IS... thats why I chose the 55-250..unless I was misinformed...
By the way, are you happy with the camera?
Dec 16, 2011 16:19:19 #
I don't think there is a big difference in range between 250 to 300. I had a 250 and bought a 300 to get that extra reach. When comparing the images side by side I thought there was ten cents worth of difference. The 55-250 is a very good lens and has IS. Be careful with the 75-300 and remember if it is the version III it has no IS.
Dec 16, 2011 16:24:09 #
larrycumba wrote:
I don't think there is a big difference in range between 250 to 300. I had a 250 and bought a 300 to get that extra reach. When comparing the images side by side I thought there was ten cents worth of difference. The 55-250 is a very good lens and has IS. Be careful with the 75-300 and remember if it is the version III it has no IS.
Mine will be the version III. Should I be getting concerned?
Dec 16, 2011 19:53:10 #
I own the 75-300 lens took about 2000 pics with it recently on a trip and I love it.
Dec 16, 2011 20:01:01 #
mollymolly wrote:
Mine will be the version III. Should I be getting concerned?
larrycumba wrote:
I don't think there is a big difference in range between 250 to 300. I had a 250 and bought a 300 to get that extra reach. When comparing the images side by side I thought there was ten cents worth of difference. The 55-250 is a very good lens and has IS. Be careful with the 75-300 and remember if it is the version III it has no IS.
Mine will be the version III. Should I be getting concerned?
Concerned about what ? If it doesn't have IS, just steady the camera or use a tripod !
Dec 16, 2011 20:13:56 #
nyweb2001 wrote:
quote=mollymolly quote=larrycumba I don't think ... (show quote)
Thanks. I can't wait to get it and more specifically to start using it!
Dec 16, 2011 23:19:08 #
If you do not have IS you do NOT necessarily need a tripod - I use a monopod for 90% of my work which includes 400mm prime lens - see below
Dec 17, 2011 03:12:47 #
Hello Mollymolly:
My first lens I bought for my 5D markII was the 75-300 III. It is an OK lens. it's rated among the cheapie low end lenses because of the lower quality optics. May I suggest you check out http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html There you will find a discription and quality rating on all of Canon's lenses as well as other brands. It was a great help to me in my selection next lens.
My first lens I bought for my 5D markII was the 75-300 III. It is an OK lens. it's rated among the cheapie low end lenses because of the lower quality optics. May I suggest you check out http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html There you will find a discription and quality rating on all of Canon's lenses as well as other brands. It was a great help to me in my selection next lens.
Dec 17, 2011 06:34:13 #
travlnman46 wrote:
Hello Mollymolly:
My first lens I bought for my 5D markII was the 75-300 III. It is an OK lens. it's rated among the cheapie low end lenses because of the lower quality optics. May I suggest you check out http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html There you will find a discription and quality rating on all of Canon's lenses as well as other brands. It was a great help to me in my selection next lens.
My first lens I bought for my 5D markII was the 75-300 III. It is an OK lens. it's rated among the cheapie low end lenses because of the lower quality optics. May I suggest you check out http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html There you will find a discription and quality rating on all of Canon's lenses as well as other brands. It was a great help to me in my selection next lens.
Thanks for sending me this information! I checked it out and its simple enough for a novice such as myself to understand. I do, eventually, want to up-grade from the "kits" lens and I bookmarked this in order to help me with my decision. With that kind of info and the help I get from UHH members, I will feel confident in the choices I make.
Dec 17, 2011 10:14:50 #
has anyone tried either a Tamron or Opteka lens? I'm looking at the prices and am wondering if they are as cheap as their prices.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.