Canon 55-200 or 75-300???

In article <Kdelh.529823$1T2.160673@pd7urf2no> "Tass" <tass.DeleteThis@islywamh.com> writes:
$ I am buying a zoom lens and my budget is fixed to either the
$Canon EF55-200 f/4.5-5.6 II USM or the Canon EF75-300mm USM lens. Here the
$55-200 is more expensive than the 75-300. Why would the 55-200 which is
$similar to the 70-300 be more $$$? I want the better quality of lens and
$picture more than distance. So I am looking for opinions on which of these
$lenses will give me better pictures. I would like an L or IS lens but this
$isn't an option. Thanks so much...this newsgroup is great.

I haven't used either one, but I know the 75-300's reputation quite
well, and the 55-200's reputation somewhat well. Take this with a
grain of salt, as you should with anything you read on the Internet.

The 55-200 has a mediocre reputation. The 75-300 is quite a good
lens in the part of its range that overlaps that of the 55-200. In
the 200-300 range, the 75-300 doesn't do as well as it does in the
lower part of its range, but then again, that's par for the course for
a consumer telephoto zoom.

If I were to have to choose between those two lenses, I'd pick
the 75-300.
--
Stephen M. Dunn <stephen.DeleteThis@stevedunn.ca>
>>>----------------> http://www.stevedunn.ca/ <----------------<<<
------------------------------------------------------------------
Say hi to my cat -- http://www.stevedunn.ca/photos/toby/
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 55-200 or 75-300??? 

"Stephen M. Dunn" <stephen RemoveThis @stevedunn.ca> wrote in message
news:JB2BEJ.1qM@stevedunn.ca...
> In article <Kdelh.529823$1T2.160673@pd7urf2no> "Tass" <tass RemoveThis @islywamh.com>
> writes:
> $ I am buying a zoom lens and my budget is fixed to either the
> $Canon EF55-200 f/4.5-5.6 II USM or the Canon EF75-300mm USM lens. Here
> the
> $55-200 is more expensive than the 75-300. Why would the 55-200 which is
> $similar to the 70-300 be more $$$? I want the better quality of lens and
> $picture more than distance. So I am looking for opinions on which of
> these
> $lenses will give me better pictures. I would like an L or IS lens but
> this
> $isn't an option. Thanks so much...this newsgroup is great.
>
> I haven't used either one, but I know the 75-300's reputation quite
> well, and the 55-200's reputation somewhat well. Take this with a
> grain of salt, as you should with anything you read on the Internet.
>
> The 55-200 has a mediocre reputation. The 75-300 is quite a good
> lens in the part of its range that overlaps that of the 55-200. In
> the 200-300 range, the 75-300 doesn't do as well as it does in the
> lower part of its range, but then again, that's par for the course for
> a consumer telephoto zoom.
>
> If I were to have to choose between those two lenses, I'd pick
> the 75-300.


Of course, IF you can wait until you CAN afford it, the 70-300 IS is a nice
lens. I really think that you would like it better.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcateg...id=150&



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 55-200 or 75-300??? 

"Tass" <tass DeleteThis @islywamh.com> wrote in message
news:Kdelh.529823$1T2.160673@pd7urf2no...
> Greetings from Vancouver Island B.C. Canada. I got my Canon XTi with the
> basic kit 18-55 lens for Christmas and I am totally impressed. This is
> my first DSLR so I am doing alot of reading here and elsewhere. My
> question
> is this. I am buying a zoom lens and my budget is fixed to either the
> Canon EF55-200 f/4.5-5.6 II USM or the Canon EF75-300mm USM lens. Here the
> 55-200 is more expensive than the 75-300. Why would the 55-200 which is
> similar to the 70-300 be more $$$? I want the better quality of lens and
> picture more than distance. So I am looking for opinions on which of
> these lenses will give me better pictures. I would like an L or IS lens
> but this isn't an option. Thanks so much...this newsgroup is great.
>
>
>
>

Hi , dunno if this helps, but the 55-200 was reviewed here:

http://www.photodo.com/topic_63.html

Doesn't SOUND great - but ALWAYS I would try it myself
HTH
Tack
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 55-200 or 75-300??? 

On December 29 2006, "U-Know-Who" <no-one.DeleteThis@nowhere.com> wrote:
> Of course, IF you can wait until you CAN afford it, the 70-300 IS is a
> nice lens. I really think that you would like it better.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
m/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=11922
>

Not bad, but f/5.6 isn't fast enough or shallow enough depth of field.
It's exactly what I hate about my 28-135mm. Otherwise it's a pretty good
lens.
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 55-200 or 75-300??? 

"Carl Miller" <carl_miller23.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:00061129230621.OUI98.carl_miller23@hotmail.com...
> On December 29 2006, "U-Know-Who" <no-one.DeleteThis@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> Of course, IF you can wait until you CAN afford it, the 70-300 IS is a
> > nice lens. I really think that you would like it better.
>>
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> m/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=11922
>>
>
> Not bad, but f/5.6 isn't fast enough or shallow enough depth of field.
> It's exactly what I hate about my 28-135mm. Otherwise it's a pretty good
> lens.
>
>

True, but if the OP could wait, I think it would be his most cost
effective/performance based route.



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 55-200 or 75-300??? 

"Tass" <tass DeleteThis @islywamh.com> wrote in message
news:Kdelh.529823$1T2.160673@pd7urf2no...
> Greetings from Vancouver Island B.C. Canada. I got my Canon XTi
> with the
> basic kit 18-55 lens for Christmas and I am totally impressed. This
> is
> my first DSLR so I am doing alot of reading here and elsewhere. My
> question
> is this. I am buying a zoom lens and my budget is fixed to either
> the
> Canon EF55-200 f/4.5-5.6 II USM or the Canon EF75-300mm USM lens.
> Here the
> 55-200 is more expensive than the 75-300. Why would the 55-200
> which is similar to the 70-300 be more $$$? I want the better
> quality of lens and picture more than distance. So I am looking for
> opinions on which of these lenses will give me better pictures. I
> would like an L or IS lens but this isn't an option. Thanks so
> much...this newsgroup is great.


Like most things in life, you get what you pay for. And when it comes
to cameras, the lense does all of the work in forming an image for the
camera to capture, so the quality of the image relies heavily on the
glass used.

Neither lense is a great performer, but may be adequate for your
needs. I would base such a purchase on features, like focus speed and
smoothness of the zoom ring where the 55-200 is probably a bit better.

However, if you want much better quality and can wait to save for a
better lense, consider the 70-200 f/4 L which is among the very best
lenses available. Or possibly the 70-300 IS which is fairly good. It's
not up to the quality of the L glass, but it offers more range and IS
for handheld shots.

--
Happy New Year!
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 55-200 or 75-300???