User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS Lens versus Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    06 Oct 2009
    Location
    Clayfield QLD
    Posts
    278
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS Lens versus Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD

    Hi everybody,

    I have a 450D with twin lens kit.

    Looking at lens options mostly for outdoor birds etc.

    I have seen a lot of good reviews for the Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD

    My question would I see much difference over the canon 55-250, will I notice the extra 50mm ,as I do find occasionally I wish I had more zoom, and would there be any noticeable difference in the quality of the images between the two.

    Thanks David.

    I
    I have this silly idea, that I should actually go and take photos with all this photography gear I have already accumulated, before I collect any more!

    See some of my photos here.
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/David...5888662?ref=hl
    And my very randomly updated blog.
    http://davidarnold.wordpress.com/

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Jul 2010
    Location
    Kelmscott
    Posts
    738
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have just bought the Tamron and I'm loving it. I haven't had much of a chance yet but I'll be showing some pics in the next few days. The reviews I've read so far show the Tamron is good throughout the full zoom and likewise centre to edge.

    I think you will miss that extra 50mm. The bird togs here usually state that 300mm is the minimum effective distance. Although there are situations where that doesn't matter - see http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...p?71701-Wisdom for a bird shot taken at 60mm.

    There is a big difference in price, with the Canon being considerably cheaper. Certainly the Tamron will be better in length and probably image quality (judging from the reviews - I don't have the Canon lens). You have to decide whether that justifies the extra cost. It certainly did for me.
    Mike

    The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes.
    Marcel Proust



  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    31 Jul 2010
    Location
    Perth Northern Suburbs
    Posts
    3,712
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Dave, Just some focal lenght notes, I use a 70-200 F2.8 L lens and added to that fit my Kenko Teleconvertor 1.4, it gives me an effective focal range of 280mm, it still leaves it lacking for the more finiky birds to reach. So if you can get more focal reach with out loosing IQ get the focal lenght IMO. If you have it and dont use it, it's better than wanting it and not having it. If that makes sense.
    They call me "Blue" it's a red head thing.
    "My Flickr Site"
    Canon Bodies - 1DMk2N + 50D - Lenses - 17-35mm F2.8 L - 24-70mm F2.8 L - 70-200mm F2.8 L - 300mm F4 IS L - Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 - Sigma 10-20mm
    " I Never get tired of looking at our diverse country, even if its through the lens of someone else".
    CC is always appreciated.


  4. #4
    Account Closed
    Join Date
    21 Jul 2010
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    422
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For birding, the longer the lens the better, with no upper limit.

    Get the longest lens you can afford.

    I would say the Tamron is too short. Image quality is not an issue with the 55-250 anyway.

    If you really wanted a 70-300, get the Canon 70-300 anyway, it's a great lens.

    For birding, whatever you get, make sure it is compatible with a dedicated teleconverter.
    They make life a misery but life wasn't meant to be easy for the non-rich birder

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •