Zoom lens, IS or USM?

[pictureperfect]

Hi all, I am looking for a decent zoom lens of at least 200m at max lenght. I was just looking at the list of lenses that Canon has to offer.

Now my main concern is whether to choose a lens with IS or USM? I can't really afford one that has both. So I am left with the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS and the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM.

Given the scenario that I'll be shooting with decent lighting and a tripod, will a lens with USM outweight the IS function for a faster shutter speed?

 

[RayDream]

Personally I would prefer the IS. Anyway base on the reviews on the internet, apparently the lens quality of the 75-300 is not very good.

If you are deciding between these two, might as well get the 70-300 IS USM to get the best of both world, although it cost about twice as much.

 

[Russ]

IS very useful for longer lenses

 

[heheapa]

IS - You definately need this for tele end, especially > 200mm, as any small shake on your hand, will translate to blur pic. Ppl always suggest for using higher shuttle speed or monopod/tripod. However, in some condition, you won't be able to use high shuttle speed due to lighting condition and, do you mind to bring a tripod/monopod out for travel?
USM - You need this if you need faster focusing speed. For shooting moving object, you definately need this. However, I will vote IS is more important than USM.
I think you may need to consider another factor EF or EF-S if you have plan for future upgrade.

Unless you can afford 70-200 f/4 IS or 70-200 f/2.8 IS, 70-300 IS is definately a better lens than the two that you mentioned.

 

[Klose]

Hi all, I am looking for a decent zoom lens of at least 200m at max lenght. I was just looking at the list of lenses that Canon has to offer.

Now my main concern is whether to choose a lens with IS or USM? I can't really afford one that has both. So I am left with the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS and the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM.

Given the scenario that I'll be shooting with decent lighting and a tripod, will a lens with USM outweight the IS function for a faster shutter speed?

Since you mentioned at least 200mm at max length, why not give the 70-200 F4L a try. You can easily grab a secondhand lens for $700-800. It's relatively featherweight light so handheld shots will not be much of an issue.

 

[Dream Merchant]

Ditto what Klose said.

For that price range of a used 70-200L f/4 non-IS ard $700-$800, nothing beats it's performance.

Also, the focusing on the second lens is horrifically slow, despite the USM, unless you're shooting in bright daylight (no clouds, sunny skies) conditions and / or using a 1D series bod.

I've heard that the 70-300 IS is a dazzlingly sharp lens - if you can get it to lock on focus. Not I say ah ... just heard.

 

[sexalicious]

what's ur budget?

 

[GavinTing]

With IS, you will be able to take shots without the tripod.. With just the USM.. No tripod you die ler..

If you can gurantee that your tripod will always follow the lens, get the USM..

Focus speed not important when cannot stay in focus right?

 

[Kit]

I just want to point out the ever present misconception of replacing the tripod with IS. That's not what IS is about.

 

[calebk]

With IS, you will be able to take shots without the tripod.. With just the USM.. No tripod you die ler..

If you can gurantee that your tripod will always follow the lens, get the USM..

Focus speed not important when cannot stay in focus right?

That's not entirely true. I have never used a tele lens with a tripod before. Monopod, yes, but no tripod. And I have definitely shot events/sports with a Sigma 100-300 f/4 HSM handheld.

Please avoid sweeping statements.

 

[xunjas]

from your choices, i would recommend the 55-250mm IS.. better optics and IS..

personally, i would recommend getting 70-200mm f/4, good and affordable. the 70-200mm f/2.8 is gd as well.

 

[pictureperfect]

I'm still a student so no L lens would actually fall into the catergory of "affordable":sweat:

Yeah, I think IS would come in handy. I'll just go with the 55-250 since I already have the smaller brother - 18-55 IS:bsmilie:

Well, thanks for all the opinions. Really appreciate it:thumbsup:

 

[MarkTan89]

Actually there really is a affordable L zoom lens - the EF 70-200 f/4L USM for S$980 @ John 3:16. But not IS la, sian.

 

[canonG9]

Actually there really is a affordable L zoom lens - the EF 70-200 f/4L USM for S$980 @ John 3:16. But not IS la, sian.

980?! .. cheaper than another place by $140!.. bought the 55-250 in the end..

 

[calebk]

980?! .. cheaper than another place by $140!.. bought the 55-250 in the end..

It is warrantied sets. I cannot remember why it's cheaper but it is with valid one year int'l warranty and perfectly new. So if you're hunting for this lens go to John 3:16 and get it cheap!

 

[Kit]

980?! .. cheaper than another place by $140!.. bought the 55-250 in the end..

"Another" place is charging high. Even Cathay is selling the lens for $1000 only.

 

[ballwackers]

Just to clarify the difference in the 70-300 range

- EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM is old and discountinued. there are probably some around but it has been replaced by the...

- EF 70-300 f4-5.6 IS (which i have) and its pretty good. no complaints. also in this ranges is the

- EF 70-300 f 4.5-5.6 DO IS (the green line lens) which about about 2x the price. Never tried it...reports suggests that it is similar quality to the 70-300.

 

[kianhock]

Hi,

i'm a student from NTU too! I've the EF-S 55-250mm IS, it's pretty sharp and IS works great. IMHO, it's small and light given the range covered, so it makes a good travelling companion for me. actually it's sharper than my Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 @ 100% crop. bokeh is pretty good imho, personally i feel it's worth the $$.

what do you usually shoot?

 

[mummum]

I will find IS + higher ISO a more useful combination compared to USM + higher ISO.

EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS focusing speed is fast for a non-USM.

 

[pictureperfect]

Hi,

i'm a student from NTU too! I've the EF-S 55-250mm IS, it's pretty sharp and IS works great. IMHO, it's small and light given the range covered, so it makes a good travelling companion for me. actually it's sharper than my Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 @ 100% crop. bokeh is pretty good imho, personally i feel it's worth the $$.

what do you usually shoot?

I kind of just started out, so I am still in the midst of finding my real interest. Whatever is pleasing to the eyes.:bsmilie: Yeah, I guess for an average hobbyist, it's a pretty decent telephoto lens to start off with.

Really appreciate all the opinions so far! You guys have been great!:thumbsup: