[BMWE90]

I'm looking to purchase a decent telephoto lens to use for a while with my XSi before upgrading to the L lenses. I'm trying to decide between the Canon 55-250mm IS and the 70-300mm IS USM. The former is about $260 and the latter is about $480. I've seen the pictures that were taken by both lenses and they all looked nice with the 70-300mm lens being a bit sharper.

I'm just wondering if the 70-300mm lens is worth the extra $220 (almost essentially doubling the price of the 55-250mm). The 55-250 would be the cheaper way to go but I don't mind spending more for a better lens (if that's the case here). Any advice is appreciated!

[Teshi]

I would honestly go for the 70-300 IS USM unless you plan to upgrade to a 70-200L later down the line. Its a great lens and one that will last you years.

I rather pay for better optics any time.

[The_Blob]

My Dad just bought a Canon 55-250mm IS about 3 weeks ago. It's nothing really amazing but the IS does help for shots over 200mm if you don't have a tripod. I'll say the lense quality is very similar to Powershot S camera models, but just a tad better in image quality due to the fact that it's designed for a SLR camera. The lense itself is very light and it's fine for casual pictures for non serious events.

If you want quality photos, I only recommend L lenses.

[BMWE90]

Teshi- yeah but I was just wondering if it's really worth it. I've heard that image quality between the 2 lenses are almost identical. I know USM would be a nice perk and that the build quality is a bit better but is it worth the extra $220? Should I just save the money for later when I upgrade?

TheBlob- I will probably upgrade to an L lens later (eyeing the 100-400mm) but for now it's more than what I want to spend. It's just for fun right now so I'm not looking to invest heavily in equipment just yet.

[clubspec330i]

70-300 is a great start.
I had that lens and sold it with my XTi when I upgrade to 5D a year ago. Now I have 70-200F2.8L IS, couldn't be happier.

I have never tried 55-200(~90-320mm) but I probably give it a shot because of price difference rather than 70-300.

Good luck,

Mack

[LOLrance]

I've also heard nothing but great things about the 70-300. Never played with or known anyone that shot with the 55-250 so i cant comment on that, but you definitely cant go wrong with the 70-300!

[Teshi]

Originally Posted by BMWE90

Teshi- yeah but I was just wondering if it's really worth it. I've heard that image quality between the 2 lenses are almost identical. I know USM would be a nice perk and that the build quality is a bit better but is it worth the extra $220? Should I just save the money for later when I upgrade?

TheBlob- I will probably upgrade to an L lens later (eyeing the 100-400mm) but for now it's more than what I want to spend. It's just for fun right now so I'm not looking to invest heavily in equipment just yet.

Oh hell yes. You never know when USM will come into play and nail that shot. I would happily pay that much extra just for USM and extra length.

To be honest, if you thinking about an L in the future. Dont rush to buy lenses now unless your job depends on it. Save for a decent lens and commit.

After 2 years, the longest lens I have is 85mm and saving for the longer lenses. Its doable.