08-19-2010, 05:56 AM
[quote name='popo' timestamp='1282149922' post='1881']
That is describing the exact reasoning I went for the DO. I don't always want to travel with big lenses (100-400L). My smaller bags effectively limit on length not width. The regular 70-300 would be too long. The only other lenses that can go 250mm+ and are physically short are the superzooms, which generally are pretty bad by the time you get to the long end. The 55-250IS was close, but EF-S mount and no USM put me off (I was also playing with a 5D1 at the same time).[/quote]
One of the nicest things I find in EF-S is those nice EF-S lenses which many times offer things that just do not exist in EF form or are way too expensive/heavy/big. Case in point: I recently got myself a 55-250 IS at about half the price of a 70-300 IS. Small, thin, great IQ and superb value-for-money . For the times I'm not sure I'll shoot tele I leave my "heavy" tele primes (100/2.8 IS, 135/2, 300/4 IS) at home and take this one. Have not used it much (when I'm not sure I'll shoot tele I usually don't) but the few pics I've snapped have proved me that it's a worthy purchase.
BTW, when I was on EF (1D) I did have the 70-300 IS, to be used in the same manner. The 70-300 DO never crossed my mind.
That is describing the exact reasoning I went for the DO. I don't always want to travel with big lenses (100-400L). My smaller bags effectively limit on length not width. The regular 70-300 would be too long. The only other lenses that can go 250mm+ and are physically short are the superzooms, which generally are pretty bad by the time you get to the long end. The 55-250IS was close, but EF-S mount and no USM put me off (I was also playing with a 5D1 at the same time).[/quote]
One of the nicest things I find in EF-S is those nice EF-S lenses which many times offer things that just do not exist in EF form or are way too expensive/heavy/big. Case in point: I recently got myself a 55-250 IS at about half the price of a 70-300 IS. Small, thin, great IQ and superb value-for-money . For the times I'm not sure I'll shoot tele I leave my "heavy" tele primes (100/2.8 IS, 135/2, 300/4 IS) at home and take this one. Have not used it much (when I'm not sure I'll shoot tele I usually don't) but the few pics I've snapped have proved me that it's a worthy purchase.
BTW, when I was on EF (1D) I did have the 70-300 IS, to be used in the same manner. The 70-300 DO never crossed my mind.