Canon 55-250IS - DEAL on B&H Photo

Discussion in 'Photography Board' started by KCmike, Jul 31, 2012.

  1. KCmike

    KCmike Never have fallen asleep on any

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Messages:
    9,011
  2. Avatar

    Google AdSense Guest Advertisement


    to hide this advert.
  3. MolonLabe

    MolonLabe DTOM

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    958
    WOW, that's $100 less than the next closest place.

    I only have a 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS kit lens that came with my T4i... I'm really tempted to pick one of those up. That's $10 less than the Sigma offering.

    How much more would I be kicking myself for getting this, instead of buying a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS lens for $1,000 more?

    Seems almost too cheap to pass up.... I know virtually nothing about lens though.
     
  4. Luvscrappin

    Luvscrappin Mouseketeer

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    290
    Its a pretty nice lens and wow that is a great price! I got one as part of my kit, but if I didn't already have one I would definitely pick it up at that price!
     
  5. bob100

    bob100 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    May 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,061
    The Sigma is better if you need an f2.8 telephoto zoom (low light shooting) but the Canon 55-250IS is sharp and will get plenty of good daytime pics for only $150

    e.g.
    Canon XSi (450D)
    with 55-250IS lens


    [​IMG]
     
  6. MolonLabe

    MolonLabe DTOM

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    958
    Thank you. Great pic too.

    Looking at the specs, min focus distance is 3.6 feet.

    I'm thinking, with all the night time WDW stuff we have lined up, I need to just put this $150 towards the Sigma f2.8 70-200 OS instead. I'm just having a hard time about the $1,299 price tag on it.

    Trying to get away cheaper but I don't see how I can and not sacrifice a lot.

    Is the 55-250 really as small and light as they say? It might have a place at that price point to use during the day and then only break out the more expensive 70-200 for the evenings...
     
  7. mom2rtk

    mom2rtk DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Messages:
    32,866
    This really is something to consider.

    I want that same Sigma lens but what has been holding me back is the size and thought of carrying it around all day. It's 3.15 pounds and 7.8" long. The Canon lens is 13.75 ounces and 4.3" long. As such, I would be less likely to drag the Sigma around with me in the parks every day.

    For reach, I have an 18-270 Tamron or a Sigma 50-150. I chose the Sigma I have becuase it's not quite as big and heavy as the 70-200 2.8's. Still, I find myself wanting something faster than the Tamron, and something with OS. My 50-150 is now available with OS, but the price and weight aren't different enough from the 700-200 to make me want to pull the trigger.
     
  8. MolonLabe

    MolonLabe DTOM

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    958
    That 50-150 might be a good option for me... At 50 I could use it for alot more closer in night time shooting and indoors stuff, where as the 70 would be cutting it close for character encounters, especially in doors.

    I also might be able to get away with not buying another closer in lens with a lower f stop than the kit lens I already have.

    I would think I could do the entire MVMCP with just the Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 APO EX DC OS HSM as the only lens I would need.

    I could then pick up a 1.4 or 2.0 teleconvertor to keep in the bag when I need the extra range...

    Pretty much all my lens decisions are going to be based on what I will encounter in a 7 day trip to WDW and the MVMCP.

    I pretty much need a f2.8 ... I don't think I can get around that.

    Still for $150, that canon lens seems like a great "knock around" lens and might save me some headaches as opposed to lugging around something larger during the day.

    Then again, I'll be in and out of rides and attractions and that 2.8 could really come in handy in places like POTC. I've always wanted to get some pictures in there. I've loved that ride since I've been 3.
     
  9. mom2rtk

    mom2rtk DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Messages:
    32,866
    I did enjoy using the 50-150 for the MVMCP parade last year. I just wished it had OS so I could go a little faster on the shutter speed. There is much to be said for the 50 end being far more usable than the 70 end on the other lens. I have absolutely found that to be the case. But the other thing that lens had going for it was its relatively compact size and weight at 5.3" and 27 ounces. But I'm still wanting some stabilization on the long end. So since there is no "perfect" answer for me...... I just continue to wait for inspiration to go one direction or another.

    But if I had no reach beyond 55........I'd be awfully tempted to go with the 55-250 for $150. You know...... for now. ;)
     
  10. MolonLabe

    MolonLabe DTOM

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    958
    Well I think I figured it out.

    For the cost of just the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS I can get:

    Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 APO EX DC OS HSM $999
    canon 55-250 IS f/4.0-5.6 IS Telephoto
    and a sigma 1.4 teleconvertor

    Personally I think that three pack would serve me better than just a 70-200 and should cover me for my trip.
     
  11. photo_chick

    photo_chick Knows a little about a lot of things, a lot about

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    4,960
    Until you've used a DSLR for a while in a given situation you won't really know what will cover you. There is a lot more to it than just the specs on paper.

    Personally I would never use a tele-zoom for night shooting unless I used a tripod. They're just too slow for my style and aperture isn't the only factor for that. And a teleconverter will make it even slower. But that all comes down to personal style.
     
  12. nbaresejr

    nbaresejr Mouseketeer

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    321
    I really have to agree with Danielle on this. Unfortunately you wont really know what you need until you return from your trip. You may think you need something now and get it and it may be totally useless for you real needs when you finally get in the situation where you need it.

    On a crop body like you have 50mm its a fairly far distance. For dark rides and character meets your going to need distance. You would be much better served getting a 17-50 2.8 sigma or tamron to replace your current 18-55 or spend the big bucks and get the canon version. for telephoto i find my 55-250 more the adequate for the few times i used it.

    this shot was taken with the 55-250
    [​IMG]
    Everest by nickbarese, on Flickr
     
  13. Gianna'sPapa

    Gianna'sPapa DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    3,881
    I agree with Danielle. Unless you have been there before and know what you need, I wouldn't buy a lens just for WDW. As far as 2.8 on the dark rides, I would go with something 1.8 or better. I use the Sigma 30 f1.4. After saying this, I do own the Sigma 70-200 that I use at WDW, but that was not my primary reason for purchasing it. Nighttime auto racing was the reason. I spend many more nights at racetracks than WDW. All my lenses are usable at WDW, but have more functionality for what I shoot at home. That is how I justify the expense.
     
  14. C&B Young

    C&B Young Twitter @CanaDisney

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2009
    Messages:
    687
    This is a crazy good price for this lens. Even in Canada, with taxes & customs fees it's half the price it would be to buy it up here. We already own the 1st version of this lens and are tempted to pick up a second. $150 is practically free in photography dollars. :)
     
  15. MolonLabe

    MolonLabe DTOM

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    958
    I agree. I got out tonight to take some night shots of the house. I also went to ChickFilA tonight for some pictures. As I'd heard on the news, the place was packed. Probably 200 people in a line outside waiting to get in. It was dusk and I experimented with difference settings and then busted out the 430 EX II speedlite and gary fong cloud diffuser. That things rocks BTW.

    I won't know for sure until I get them off the camera, too late to mess with it tonight. I need to go to bed in a few min.

    I did notice some extended times shooting the house tonight for the auto focus. It was pretty dark. The minimal lighting at the chickfila (what I recall being similar or less to any place in WDW outside) didn't seem to slow it down. Of course that isn't a telephoto either. Thanks for that tip.

    I really don't shoot anything else, lol. I should say, my whole purpose for getting this camera was to make up for times my G11 wouldn't cut it for the last trip. It did amazing for being a PnS but I wanted more and more consistency.

    -----------------

    I also did some shooting of a mock character encounter... you guys are 100% correct, no way I could use a 70. I'd be too far away for many of them. The 55 is really too far away to stand and get everyone in the frame.

    Trial and error. I believe I will order just this discounted lens and then I'll have a full range of 18 all the way to 250 between the two lens and then just trial and error it out for a month before doing anything else.

    Thanks everyone.

    There is way more to this than I thought. Every time I learn one thing, I need to learn about half a dozen other things to understand what I thought I learned at first.

    :teacher:
     
  16. MolonLabe

    MolonLabe DTOM

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    958
    I wanted to expound on this a bit, the 50-150 Sigma isn't listed as telephoto, as compared with others at the 70-200 (or more) which are.
    http://www.adorama.com/SG50150AEOS.html

    Would that still be considered telephoto and have the same speed issues or is it under the telephoto designation and more like a traditional lens... if that term can used.

    Thanks!
     
  17. nbaresejr

    nbaresejr Mouseketeer

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    321
    For me i could consider it a telephoto (it may or may not actually be 1). That lens is pretty big and heavy (almost 3 lbs). Its going to be somewhat hard to hold on the t4i. Also i still dont see the need for a telephoto with the type of pics you said you wanted. Before buying a telephoto i would invest in a wide angle (if you want 2.8 the Tokina 11-16 is great) or a Sigma 30mm 1.4 prime. The 30mm is regarded as one of the best primes for a crop body. Low light shots and characters should be good with that.

    Really what you need to do it find a camera shop and try some of this stuff out. Attach it to your camera so you can see size and weight. Your going to have to carry this stuff around all day.

    Renting a lens for this trip might be a good option also. This will prevent you from making a $1000 mistake purchase.
     
  18. Frantasmic

    Frantasmic <font color=green>*crickets*<br><font color=blue>I

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,134
    I say this tongue in cheek somewhat, but are you trying to shoot a parade from your hotel balcony or something? I don't understand the need for a teleconvertor. It adds a stop to your best aperture. I just don't see anything dark that needs that much reach.

    I think you pick up the canon just because it is a great deal and you will find a ton of uses for it in good lighting, as bob has demonstrated.

    The sigma 30 or the tokina 11-16 are also good choices. There are a lot of lenses that are good in the 1.8 - 2.8 region, some prime, some telephoto, that would be good to have. But, don't limit your lens choice to what you think would be good to have for parades at night at disney. A 2.8 isn't going to be "magic" and allow you to play in the parks and come stand at the back of the parade at the last minute and get good shots. If you are really interested in good parade shots, get up close with a great prime lens. In other words, be prepared to stand in line an hour or two early to get a good spot.
     
  19. mom2rtk

    mom2rtk DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Messages:
    32,866
    Have you considered renting one of the 2.8 telephotos for your trip? At the very least I'd get to a camera store and hold one to see how heavy it is.

    I was pretty driven to get a 70-200 2.8. Until I rented one for my son's high school graduation. I was glad I did and got some nice shots, but knew after that day that it's not something I'd want to carry around Disney.
     
  20. bob100

    bob100 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    May 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,061
    I agree with the others, go to a store and handle them first before buying. Having an f2.8 longer focal length lens is nice for many things but not necessarily Disney. Also teleconverters work only on some lens and it affects resolution and AF. For me a wide, large aperture lens would be better for Disney rides.
     
  21. Gianna'sPapa

    Gianna'sPapa DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    3,881
    While I agree that a 2.8 isn't always necessary and it does come with a weight issue (for some). Like everything in photography, there are compromises. I would not go to WDW without my 70-200 f2.8. There are images like below that are necessary for me that I would struggle to get without it. My experience is that how you carry the equipment is just as important as what you bring. Pre-Black Rapid, I had a good neck strap, but with the heavier lenses, it didn't take long before I had raging neck pain and a headache. Now with the BR, I hang the 70-200 (attached to the camera of course) by the lens tripod mount and with the battery grip the camera is well balanced. I don't feel the weight and I can carry it all day without fatigue. When its not on the camera, its in my bag. The three lbs. really doesn't make a difference (for me).

    1/250 sec, f2.8, 200mm, ISO 3200, no flash
    [​IMG]
    Mickey and Minnie MK by Terry McGraw Photography, on Flickr
     

Share This Page