Slickdeals.net

Slickdeals.net (http://slickdeals.net/forums/index.php)
-   Deal Talk (http://slickdeals.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 III lens + EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens for $179 from Adorama.com (http://slickdeals.net/f/5881878-canon-ef-75-300mm-f-4-5-6-iii-lens-ef-50mm-f-1-8-ii-lens-for-179-from-adorama-com)

zc8 02-28-2013 09:51 PM

Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 III lens + EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens for $179 from Adorama.com
 
2 Attachment(s)
Title says it all.
Special combo (Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 III lens + EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens) for $179.
It says $324. After you add it to shopping cart, price is down to $179.
+2% reward. Do not forget 1% CB from MR rebate
Free shipping.

http://www.adorama.com/CA75300AFUZ.html

Deal is dead NOW

Discombobulated 02-28-2013 09:51 PM

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Lens + Canon 50mm f/1.8 II Lens $179 + Free Shipping
 
1 Attachment(s)
Adorama has Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Lens + Canon 50mm f/1.8 II Lens for $179. Must add to cart for discount. Shipping is free. Thanks zc8

gabe23111 02-28-2013 09:56 PM

OP... You forgot the link :lol:

Looks like price is reflected in cart.

Link [adorama.com]

Edit: Never mind... looks like a mod added the link to the OP

yuugotserved 02-28-2013 09:56 PM

Very nice! 75-300mm was $100 at Staples recently, so nifty fifty for only $79.

bestco 02-28-2013 10:50 PM

are these good for macro shots?

bikehigh 02-28-2013 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bestco (Post 57904058)
are these good for macro shots?

The 50 is.

NKDigoxin 02-28-2013 10:52 PM

i recommend getting the IS version of the 70-300mm telephoto lens. makes a HUGE difference

ImmaSquashYou 02-28-2013 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ColtsFan18 (Post 57904080)
i recommend getting the IS version of the 70-300mm telephoto lens. makes a HUGE difference

Ditto, if it was the 70-300 WITH the 50mm, i'd be buying like 15 of them. LOL

Hydraridaz 02-28-2013 11:22 PM

PRICE mistake?

dealrocks 03-01-2013 12:10 AM

are these same? http://www.amazon.com/Canon-75-30...B00004THD0

NKDigoxin 03-01-2013 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dealrocks (Post 57904804)

yes, it's the same as the non-USM, non IS version, i believe

jjm5119 03-01-2013 03:41 AM

gotta be a mistake.

EDIT: i thought it said 55-250 :p

Jer-Bear20 03-01-2013 03:55 AM

I'm a noob with cameras. I have a T4i with a 18-55 and 55-250 both IS lenses. Is this worth it for me to pick up to have a few extra lenses?

SamG5561 03-01-2013 04:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jer-Bear20 (Post 57906138)
I'm a noob with cameras. I have a T4i with a 18-55 and 55-250 both IS lenses. Is this worth it for me to pick up to have a few extra lenses?

Well, IS stands for 'Image Stabilization'. Basically it means that you can hand-hold the camera in certain conditions and the lens will (reasonably) prevent your pictures from getting blurry due to camera shake. If you can afford the IS, definitely go for it. These lenses are just fine though if you plan on using a solid tripod. Doubt you'll be doing that with a macro tho'.

maslo1nsk 03-01-2013 04:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jer-Bear20 (Post 57906138)
I'm a noob with cameras. I have a T4i with a 18-55 and 55-250 both IS lenses. Is this worth it for me to pick up to have a few extra lenses?

You already have 55-250mm IS, so you dont need 75-300mm, especially without image stabilization. You can getl50mm for nice bokeh. I recently sold 75-300m for 100 $ on craigslist, 79 $ for 50mm is really nice.

vanbach0 03-01-2013 04:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jer-Bear20 (Post 57906138)
I'm a noob with cameras. I have a T4i with a 18-55 and 55-250 both IS lenses. Is this worth it for me to pick up to have a few extra lenses?

The 75-300 will be useless to you. But you should make it a point to pick up the 50mm one way or another.

andromeda3 03-01-2013 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jer-Bear20 (Post 57906138)
I'm a noob with cameras. I have a T4i with a 18-55 and 55-250 both IS lenses. Is this worth it for me to pick up to have a few extra lenses?

Since you are a noob you are better off learning the camera features and the usage of the existing lenses. You could only make use of the 1.8 at this time to pull great portraits. The 70-300 without IS would be a good to have item but only later on.

Jer-Bear20 03-01-2013 04:34 AM

Thanks vanbach0 and andromeda3. Looks like I'm holding out for something better.

memarr7 03-01-2013 05:00 AM

I've got my camera basics down, but don't know so much about lenses. I just have the kit lens for my canon rebel. Have been thinking about grabbing a nifty fifty for portraits for some time now since they seem solid and cheap. Trying to decide if this is a good deal....

Jeffbx 03-01-2013 05:30 AM

This is a GREAT deal for these 2 lenses - I think I paid a similar amount for both of these on the used market.

The 50mm is one of the most popular & versatile lenses you can find for under $100 - it's an excellent portrait & macro lens.

And the 70-300 is not the most popular lens in the Canon line-up, but don't worry about the negative comments - for the price, it works beautifully outside in bright sunlight. Just don't try using it in any type of low light situation. I keep it in my bag for very occasional use & it has come in pretty handy on several occasions.

PiratePenguin 03-01-2013 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanbach0 (Post 57906338)
The 75-300 will be useless to you. But you should make it a point to pick up the 50mm one way or another.

I cannot recommend the 50mm 1.8 to anyone with the t4i. They should all be getting the 40mm stm. The 40mm stm is the new 50mm. Its far better.

PiratePenguin 03-01-2013 05:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffbx (Post 57906948)
This is a GREAT deal for these 2 lenses - I think I paid a similar amount for both of these on the used market.

The 50mm is one of the most popular & versatile lenses you can find for under $100 - it's an excellent portrait & macro lens.

And the 70-300 is not the most popular lens in the Canon line-up, but don't worry about the negative comments - for the price, it works beautifully outside in bright sunlight. Just don't try using it in any type of low light situation. I keep it in my bag for very occasional use & it has come in pretty handy on several occasions.

First this isnt a Great deal. the 50mm goes for $92 often new. The 75-300 can be had for 100 or less new as well.

This isnt the 70-300 which you suggest, which actually is a good lens. This is the crappy 75-300. The only people who say this lens is good are ones who havent used any other zoom lens besides it.

spidrw 03-01-2013 05:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nizzy1115 (Post 57906954)
I cannot recommend the 50mm 1.8 to anyone with the t4i. They should all be getting the 40mm stm. The 40mm stm is the new 50mm. Its far better.

Even with the 2.8 aperture on the 40 versus 1.8 on the 50?

XReflection 03-01-2013 05:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bestco (Post 57904058)
are these good for macro shots?

Quote:

Originally Posted by oolong8 (Post 57904072)
The 50 is.


I think it depends on how close you want your macro shots to be. You won't be able to take really up close photos. For most things it'll probably suffice, but I've had issues taking up close pictures of food as the lens won't focus properly. It's definitely closer than a zoom lens or something, but if you really want to do macro, I'd spend the extra on a half decent macro lens.

sniperruff 03-01-2013 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spidrw (Post 57907084)
Even with the 2.8 aperture on the 40 versus 1.8 on the 50?

Agreed. They are two different lenses and one doesn't replace another.

the 50mm f1.8 is 1.3 stops faster and a lot more useful in low-light setting
the 40mm f2.8 is slightly shorter and as STM so it'd be useful for videos
the 50mm f1.8 can be had for ~$100
the 40mm f2.8 rarely drops below $150

Both lenses have great image quality. Saying the 40mm f2.8 replaces the 50mm f1.8 is like saying the 70-200mm f4 IS replaces the 70-200mm f2.8.

PiratePenguin 03-01-2013 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spidrw (Post 57907084)
Even with the 2.8 aperture on the 40?

Yes, read the reviews that compare it to the 1.8 50mm. I'll leave it up to the pros to convince you. The 40mm is optically better.

http://www.the-digital-picture.co...eview.aspx

http://www.dpchallenge.com/forum....ID=1173344

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums...t-41851830

vanbach0 03-01-2013 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nizzy1115 (Post 57906954)
I cannot recommend the 50mm 1.8 to anyone with the t4i. They should all be getting the 40mm stm. The 40mm stm is the new 50mm. Its far better.

I have to disagree, respectfully. If you shoot video then the STM is a nice upgrade but otherwise the 40mm is around 50% more than the 50mm when you find it on sale, and for someone who's only using kit lenses the 50mm is still a huge improvement. On top of that, f/2.8 doesn't begin to compete with f/1.8 for tight depth of field and low light shooting.

Maybe the 40mm fits some people's needs better and if you want to kick in the extra $50 I understand, but still for $100 or less on sale the 50mm is an absolute steal.

Jeffbx 03-01-2013 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nizzy1115 (Post 57906978)
First this isnt a Great deal. the 50mm goes for $92 often new. The 75-300 can be had for 100 or less new as well.

This isnt the 70-300 which you suggest, which actually is a good lens. This is the crappy 75-300. The only people who say this lens is good are ones who havent used any other zoom lens besides it.

So it's not a great deal because you can get them for more separately? :)

It IS a great deal because you can buy this package, use the lenses for a year, and then re-sell them for the same price you paid if you find you don't like them.

Typo was my fault - I did mean 75-300.

And yes I have a number of other zoom lenses & I still keep my crappy 75-300 in my bag for occasional use. Yes, of COURSE the 70-300IS is a better lens, but it also costs $500 more.

AlohaNoKaOi 03-01-2013 05:50 AM

Quote:

I'm a noob with cameras. I have a T4i with a 18-55 and 55-250 both IS lenses. Is this worth it for me to pick up to have a few extra lenses?
You already have a zoom and a good camera. I would suggest save your money and buy a better more expensive zoom later. The 50mm is actually a good lens but you can get that by itself for around $100.

Quote:

Trying to decide if this is a good deal....
This is a good deal if you don't have a zoom lens and need one for a low price but like one of the guy above me said, if you are noob then I suggest getting one with the IS.

Nine.7.Three 03-01-2013 05:51 AM

very little, if any, resale value on this combo. On my local CL, each lens could be had for roughly $90 each. i wish the IS version of the 75-300 was included.

sniperruff 03-01-2013 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XReflection (Post 57907164)
I think it depends on how close you want your macro shots to be. You won't be able to take really up close photos. For most things it'll probably suffice, but I've had issues taking up close pictures of food as the lens won't focus properly. It's definitely closer than a zoom lens or something, but if you really want to do macro, I'd spend the extra on a half decent macro lens.

Kudos for clarifying. The 50mm f1.8 is far from a good "macro" lens since its minimum focus distance (MFD) is quite a bit longer than true macro lenses like the EF-S 60mm f2.8 or even the quasi-macro lens like the 50mm f2.5, and also can't match either lenses in maximum magnification. Heck, it's even inferior in both categories compared to the kit lens EF-S 18-55mm f3.5 - 5.6:

http://www.dpreview.com/products/...=ascending

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nine.7.Three (Post 57907318)
very little, if any, resale value on this combo. On my local CL, each lens could be had for roughly $90 each. i wish the IS version of the 75-300 was included.

Agreed. I think it's a tough sale to get $100 on the 75-300mm since there are so many copies from previous deals. BTW the 75-300mm IS isn't actually that great according to reviews. The 70-300mm IS USM on the other hand, is a much better lens but it is a $350 lens by itself.

jasonalee 03-01-2013 06:05 AM

I have the 55-250 and am happy with that but would the 75-300 be any improvement with distance shooting track meets or wildlife pics outdoors? Thanks

fyu 03-01-2013 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasonalee (Post 57907576)
I have the 55-250 and am happy with that but would the 75-300 be any improvement with distance shooting track meets or wildlife pics outdoors? Thanks

nope.

DQue 03-01-2013 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanbach0 (Post 57907230)
I have to disagree, respectfully. If you shoot video then the STM is a nice upgrade but otherwise the 40mm is around 50% more than the 50mm when you find it on sale, and for someone who's only using kit lenses the 50mm is still a huge improvement. On top of that, f/2.8 doesn't begin to compete with f/1.8 for tight depth of field and low light shooting.

Maybe the 40mm fits some people's needs better and if you want to kick in the extra $50 I understand, but still for $100 or less on sale the 50mm is an absolute steal.

You mean you did NOT get that Canon 40mm pancake lense during the BB $50 off coupon fiasco? Common, that lense for $110!! Compared to the $90-100 50mm f1.8, I'll take the pancake quicker than you can say "Kazoom!":D

jasonalee 03-01-2013 06:18 AM

OK thanks, and what would be the next best step up for that then? If I was wanting to get a little more range with a lens.

fyu 03-01-2013 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasonalee (Post 57907818)
OK thanks, and what would be the next best step up for that then? If I was wanting to get a little more range with a lens.

either of the 70-300mm
any of the 70-200mm ( depending on your needs) maybe with an extender
100-400mm

yea, it gets pricey.

soxela 03-01-2013 06:51 AM

How come recently all the deals have been on canon lenses and non for a nikon....?

memarr7 03-01-2013 07:02 AM

Still torn. Currently all I have is a Canon Rebel w/ kit lens. I'm low on the dough.

PiratePenguin 03-01-2013 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soxela (Post 57908532)
How come recently all the deals have been on canon lenses and non for a nikon....?

And that is why I dropped off the nikon ship. You buy a brand for the lenses, more sales on canons and just as good resale value due to more market demand.

slippyfox 03-01-2013 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jer-Bear20 (Post 57906138)
I'm a noob with cameras. I have a T4i with a 18-55 and 55-250 both IS lenses. Is this worth it for me to pick up to have a few extra lenses?

Honestly, you have a decent zoom len in the 55-250. The 50mm, try it from BestBuy if you want, it's optically a good lens, but basically a small zoom on a T4i (crop sensor). It's also cheaply constructed, and noisy by comparison to an STM based lens.

I tried, honestly tried to like the 50mm. Exchanged it for the 40mm STM and couldn't be happier. Matches the camera well (tight to the body, well constructed, light). Optically very good, and still pretty bright.

Just remember "bright", 1.8f lens doesn't mean you are going to be shooting indoor with candlelight and high shutter speeds :)

Another good way to look at it. Take your 18-55, and set it to about 50mm. Can you walk around and shoot whatever you want to shoot at that length? If you can live with it, don't care about construction\quality of the body of the lens, it's great get it when it dips down to $95ish. Of find it used from someone that upgraded to the 1.4 50mm on Craigslist.

The 75-300, like I said, you have a nice zoom in the 55-250....kinda redundant IMHO.

Keep an eye out for the 18-135 STM. Awesome. Lens.

Hydraridaz 03-01-2013 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soxela (Post 57908532)
How come recently all the deals have been on canon lenses and non for a nikon....?

dude... i notice canon lens on sale much more often than nikon year round... that's also the reason why i bought canon instead of nikon.

Hydraridaz 03-01-2013 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slippyfox (Post 57909032)

Another good way to look at it. Take your 18-55, and set it to about 50mm. Can you walk around and shoot whatever you want to shoot at that length? If you can live with it, don't care about construction\quality of the body of the lens, it's great get it when it dips down to $95ish. Of find it used from someone that upgraded to the 1.4 50mm on Craigslist.

The 75-300, like I said, you have a nice zoom in the 55-250....kinda redundant IMHO.

Keep an eye out for the 18-135 STM. Awesome. Lens.

the point is to get quality pictures, and advantage of F1.8 , it makes much sharper image when you shooting portraits
but i do agree on 18-135 STM , it would be much better to photograph walk around and still able to record decent videos.

slippyfox 03-01-2013 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hydraridaz (Post 57909198)
the point is to get quality pictures, and advantage of F1.8 , it makes much sharper image when you shooting portraits
but i do agree on 18-135 STM , it would be much better to photograph walk around and still able to record decent videos.

Well, consider that when you start getting down to that aperture your focus depth is getting thinner and thinner.

But you are absolutely right, the point is quality pictures.

The camera and lens you have with you, is the one you use! :)

In just my opinion, everything you do when you choose a lens is a game of compromises. The compromises in the 1.8 50mm, are too great compared to the 40mm pancake. If this were the 1.4 50mm at near this price I wouldn't have even said anything :)

cgigate 03-01-2013 07:28 AM

Canon EF 75-300mm len is joke!
staples always sells at $99, if you have $25 off coupon, it is $75 ...

NgH 03-01-2013 07:28 AM

this is not a good deal, 50 f1.8 is a good one I agree, but its cost often sale below $100 (around 90), and the 75-300 isn't worth for $80

Hthr 03-01-2013 07:43 AM

Thanks a lot, SDers... I read this and decided I cannot live one more day without a 40mm pancake.

theomnij 03-01-2013 07:48 AM

Anyone have this work? I can NOT?

hbsjr 03-01-2013 07:57 AM

is this compatible with Panasonic LUMIX DMC-GF5K ?

DocMo 03-01-2013 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nizzy1115 (Post 57906954)
I cannot recommend the 50mm 1.8 to anyone with the t4i. They should all be getting the 40mm stm. The 40mm stm is the new 50mm. Its far better.

I gotta admit... The 50 1.8 on my T4i is soft at a variety of stops. Not sure if I have a bum copy or not. The 40, on the other hand, is very nice!! :nod:

I'm going FF soon and I'll see how the 50 looks when that time comes (maybe it will benefit from the focus adjustment). If not, then I'll either send it to Canon for calibration or sell it.

vanbach0 03-01-2013 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hbsjr (Post 57910312)
is this compatible with Panasonic LUMIX DMC-GF5K ?

No. ..

DocMo 03-01-2013 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nizzy1115 (Post 57909026)
And that is why I dropped off the nikon ship. You buy a brand for the lenses, more sales on canons and just as good resale value due to more market demand.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hydraridaz (Post 57909108)
dude... i notice canon lens on sale much more often than nikon year round... that's also the reason why i bought canon instead of nikon.

This. I mean, people are more than welcome to buy Nikon (and Apple for that matter). Many will swear up and down about the quality and product differentiation and (honestly) will feel mighty proud of themselves b/c of the product they use. Got for it.

Me... I like good prices and don't like being "stuck" with a proprietary line with very few discounted options. (That and it's painful to watch my "elite" Apple students struggle when it's time to do a PowerPoint presentation, though this has gotten better over the past few years).

Please, no flame war, please. It really is to each his own.

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ColtsFan18 (Post 57904080)
i recommend getting the IS version of the 70-300mm telephoto lens. makes a HUGE difference

There is no such thing as a Canon 70-300mm without IS. However, of all the 75-300mm models, the "most recommended" version is the IS version that was only sold in Europe.

Luxowell 03-01-2013 08:27 AM

75-300 might just be the worst lens canon makes. Total crap stinker. I had one, and tripod shots on days with good light still came out pillow soft. The 50 1.8 is wonderful, but the 75-300 drags this deal down.

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luxowell (Post 57911266)
75-300 might just be the worst lens canon makes. Total crap stinker. I had one, and tripod shots on days with good light still came out pillow soft. The 50 1.8 is wonderful, but the 75-300 drags this deal down.

It is the worst lens they make. It is garbage. This deal should not be FP--the lens just isn't worth plunking down $80. The 50 1.8 though...

My sympathies to anyone who buys a 75-300--even the 55-250mm puts it to shame for only $150.

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DocMo (Post 57910622)
I gotta admit... The 50 1.8 on my T4i is soft at a variety of stops. Not sure if I have a bum copy or not. The 40, on the other hand, is very nice!! :nod:

I'm going FF soon and I'll see how the 50 looks when that time comes (maybe it will benefit from the focus adjustment). If not, then I'll either send it to Canon for calibration or sell it.

You got a crap copy--the 50 1.8 should be quite sharp at its widest aperture. More than likely, it just needs microadjustment (too bad your t4i doesn't have that feature).

There's only a handful of elements in the 50 1.8--there's very little that can get misaligned inside, even from a hard fall.

postwar 03-01-2013 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XReflection (Post 57907164)
I think it depends on how close you want your macro shots to be. You won't be able to take really up close photos. For most things it'll probably suffice, but I've had issues taking up close pictures of food as the lens won't focus properly. It's definitely closer than a zoom lens or something, but if you really want to do macro, I'd spend the extra on a half decent macro lens.

I've been doing photography for a while and used that 50 in weddings. I know for sure the 50 isn't a real macro so I agree with you XR. I think they in fact do make the 50 in a macro model, but a simple google search said slap on an extension tube and you have a macro lens. not sure exactly what those are, I should but don't. I think I googled "canon 50 1.8 macro" and found that answer.

sniperruff 03-01-2013 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57911264)
There is no such thing as a Canon 70-300mm without IS. However, of all the 75-300mm models, the "most recommended" version is the IS version that was only sold in Europe.

I am pretty sure that the 75-300mm IS was sold in the US as well. Granted, it only had a 2-stop IS IIRC.

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sniperruff (Post 57911448)
I am pretty sure that the 75-300mm IS was sold in the US as well. Granted, it only had a 2-stop IS IIRC.

My mistake, I meant "primarily"--it was available in the USA, just wasn't marketed as heavily over here. As such, there are very few copies floating around on this side.

Don't underestimate 2-stop IS--the 100-400L has the same, and it is still very effective for handholding, and one of Canon's most sold lenses.

memarr7 03-01-2013 08:38 AM

After reading these comments, I think I am going to go buy the 50 1.8 solo someplace else. Sounds like no one is a fan of the other 75-300 lens, and I can do without it. Thanks guys!

preppyak 03-01-2013 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nizzy1115 (Post 57907206)
Yes, read the reviews that compare it to the 1.8 50mm. I'll leave it up to the pros to convince you. The 40mm is optically better.

http://www.the-digital-picture.co...eview.aspx

http://www.dpchallenge.com/forum....ID=1173344

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums...t-41851830

True, the 40mm is slightly better optically...but, its pretty easy to find f/2.8 zooms. The beauty of the 50mm is that it gives you that extra 1 and 1/3 stops, which can be key for low-light scenes.

At f/2.8, I found them to basically be the same; 40mm maybe a touch sharper in the corners. Doubt you could tell the difference. I owned both of them for about 2 weeks, sold the 40mm after only a few uses. If you already owned one, I wouldn't get the other. And if I were getting just one, it'd be the 50mm, since it can do things the 40mm cant

sniperruff 03-01-2013 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57911582)
My mistake, I meant "primarily"--it was available in the USA, just wasn't marketed as heavily over here. As such, there are very few copies floating around on this side.

Don't underestimate 2-stop IS--the 100-400L has the same, and it is still very effective for handholding, and one of Canon's most sold lenses.

It's better than nothing, but I personally would never buy a used copy of the 75-300mm IS for $200+ when you can have a perfectly fine EF-S 55-250mm with a 4-stop IS for $150, while the 70-300mm IS can be had for about $150 more if one possess a FF body.

I actually almost came across a chance to buy the 75-300mm IS for $50 off Craigslist, but then the owner realized how much it's worth and listed it at $200.

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by postwar (Post 57911430)
I've been doing photography for a while and used that 50 in weddings. I know for sure the 50 isn't a real macro so I agree with you XR. I think they in fact do make the 50 in a macro model, but a simple google search said slap on an extension tube and you have a macro lens. not sure exactly what those are, I should but don't. I think I googled "canon 50 1.8 macro" and found that answer.


They make a 50mm 2.5 macro, which is a 1:2. For macro purposes, it is completely superior to the 50 1.8. You could buy a life-size converter accessory that bumped the lens to 1:1 macro, but you lost infinity focus for standard use.

A lot of lenses get the "macro" designation, because they're very, very lax in terms of the actual designation. A lens only has to be something like 1:5 (or it was 1:3.5) to qualify for that stamp, but only 1:1 and better are considered true macro.

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sniperruff (Post 57911708)
It's better than nothing, but I personally would never buy a used copy of the 75-300mm IS for $200+ when you can have a perfectly fine EF-S 55-250mm with a 4-stop IS for $150, while the 70-300mm IS can be had for about $150 more if one possess a FF body.

I actually almost came across a chance to buy the 75-300mm IS for $50 off Craigslist, but then the owner realized how much it's worth and listed it at $200.

Have had all of them, and the 70-300 IS and 70-300 DO are not good lenses--roughly equivalent to the 55-250mm on APS-C, with worse IS motor, better build. It's a shame there's nothing better in the canon lineup (in that focal length range) until you break $1000 (exception: 70-200 f4)

PiratePenguin 03-01-2013 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luxowell (Post 57911266)
75-300 might just be the worst lens canon makes. Total crap stinker. I had one, and tripod shots on days with good light still came out pillow soft. The 50 1.8 is wonderful, but the 75-300 drags this deal down.

The whole reason they are doing this deal is to offload their stockpile of this crap lens.

ZLeathal1 03-01-2013 08:47 AM

Yes... the 22-250 is a better lens than the 75~300. But if you don't have the 50mm already, you will get your money's worth from the 300mm. I still use mine quite a bit.

If you're comparing these to pro-grade lenses, why are you here?

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hbsjr (Post 57910312)
is this compatible with Panasonic LUMIX DMC-GF5K ?

only if you get an adapter, and then you lose autofocus, image stabilization, exif data, etc. Also, infinity focus goes byebye on longer lenses.

http://www.amazon.com/RAINBOWIMAG...B003150B6O

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZLeathal1 (Post 57911920)
Yes... the 22-250 is a better lens than the 75~300. But if you don't have the 50mm already, you will get your money's worth from the 300mm. I still use mine quite a bit.

If you're comparing these to pro-grade lenses, why are you here?

You mean the 55-250mm. Just so no one else is confused.

ZLeathal1 03-01-2013 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57911968)
only if you get an adapter, and then you lose autofocus, image stabilization, exif data, etc. Also, infinity focus goes byebye on longer lenses.

http://www.amazon.com/RAINBOWIMAG...B003150B6O


You mean the 55-250mm. Just so no one else is confused.

Yes... sorry... misaligned on the keypad. :)

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nizzy1115 (Post 57911874)
The whole reason they are doing this deal is to offload their stockpile of this crap lens.

Wrong--they've been having deals on the 75-300mm lenses for many years--they're not about to discontinue it. Notice that it's on the THIRD iteration (of the non-IS version) of this lens, and each one before it was just as bad. It will continue to be available for quite some time, because there will always be people who want to trade off image quality in favor of money.

PiratePenguin 03-01-2013 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57912036)
Wrong--they've been having deals on the 75-300mm lenses for many years--they're not about to discontinue it. Notice that it's on the THIRD iteration (of the non-IS version) of this lens, and each one before it was just as bad. It will continue to be available for quite some time, because there will always be people who want to trade off image quality in favor of money.

Did I every once say they were discontinuing the model? :shake:

I said they were offloading their overstock of this crap lens because no one wants it by itself.

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nizzy1115 (Post 57912084)
Did I every once say they were discontinuing the model? :shake:

I said they were offloading their overstock of this crap lens because no one wants it by itself.

One implies the other. Again, that is not the reason for the sale. If they really ordered these things by the thousands--and they have not--they could just send them back to Canon for full compensation. So your argument doesn't hold water. At all.

langjie 03-01-2013 08:55 AM

not sure how this is FP? yes as a packaged value it's a good deal but many, many people have said the 75-300mm is no good so why bother buying it? save your money, get the nifty fifty for $100 and save your $79 to invest in the much better 55-250 mm with IS

PiratePenguin 03-01-2013 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57912118)
One implies the other. Again, that is not the reason for the sale. If they really ordered these things by the thousands--and they have not--they could just send them back to Canon for full compensation. So your argument doesn't hold water. At all.

Ugh, they can offload them cheap to the public here and still make a profit over what they paid canon.

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by langjie (Post 57912148)
not sure how this is FP? yes as a packaged value it's a good deal but many, many people have said the 75-300mm is no good so why bother buying it? save your money, get the nifty fifty for $100 and save your $79 to invest in the much better 55-250 mm with IS

No idea at all. Canon does itself a great disservice by continuing to sell that piece of junk. Anyone shooting a full-frame or APS-H body can already afford at least the 70-300 IS, so the novelty of this lens wears off. The 55-250mm is the much better buy for APS-C bodies.

theomnij 03-01-2013 09:02 AM

I love the conversation about who has the biggest lens!

But I still can Not get the deal to work, any help of detail would be appreciated.
Then we can all measure our auto focus............

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nizzy1115 (Post 57912192)
Ugh, they can offload them cheap to the public here and still make a profit over what they paid canon.

Not at roughly $80 (pricing the 50 1.8 at $100). Do you honestly think it only costs $20 for them to make a 75-300mm (as crappy as it is)? Remember that Canon turns a profit when they sell to their distributors.

More than likely the deal is being subsidized directly by Canon for a period of time, and we'll be seeing similar bundles available from other retailers soon enough.

If you want a real answer, ask Helen O @ adorama--she's very helpful, and has a large web presence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by theomnij (Post 57912382)
I love the conversation about who has the biggest lens!

But I still can Not get the deal to work, any help of detail would be appreciated.
Then we can all measure our auto focus............

It's not about the bigger lens, it's about the BETTER lens. Very big difference :) Otherwise, pick up the Phoenix 1200mm f/6.3 lens for $120 and see how good that is :lol: You do get what you pay for.

PiratePenguin 03-01-2013 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57912384)
Not at roughly $80 (pricing the 50 1.8 at $100). Do you honestly think it only costs $20 for them to make a 75-300mm (as crappy as it is)? Remember that Canon turns a profit when they sell to their distributors.

More than likely the deal is being subsidized directly by Canon for a period of time, and we'll be seeing similar bundles available from other retailers soon enough.

The 50mm sells for $90 often, and that probably has a profit margin of $10-20.

The 75-300 likely is bought from canon again around the $75-90 mark, meaning they can price these two lenses together for 180 and still make a bit of coin.

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nizzy1115 (Post 57912484)
The 50mm sells for $90 often, and that probably has a profit margin of $10-20.

The 75-300 likely is bought from canon again around the $75-90 mark, meaning they can price these two lenses together for 180 and still make a bit of coin.

If you want a real answer, ask Helen O @ adorama--she's very helpful, and has a large web presence.

Authorized Canon retailers are REQUIRED to maintain minimum pricing standards--and that applies to combo deals as well. If they just price them at whatever value they want (say cost + $10), then they lose their authorized retailer status, and that has heavy implications. So no, they're not going to just blow out whatever lenses they want.

Consider the Sigma 30mm + 19mm combo deals that were available for $200 (normally $400) last month--people thought it was a pricing mistake, until we found out that it was a promotional pricing, sponsored direct from Sigma. After several days available through one retailer, all of the others offered that pricing as well. They were authorized to sell at that price, and were subsidized by the manufacturer for EVERY purchase, specifically for that combo.


As logical as your assumptions may be, that doesn't mean they're grounded in reality :) These aren't clothing lines that get blown out at end-of-season--these lenses hold their pricing for decades sometimes.

atrip25 03-01-2013 10:23 AM

I have a Canon EOS 20D camera with a 15-85mm lens. I was thinking about selling it and upgrading to a ti3 or ti4. You think I would get more benefit from a better lens or upgrading my camera?

nufan8888 03-01-2013 10:24 AM

i would upgrade but coming from 20d, i would suggest 60d or 7d if u are stuck with APS. if not 6d! 6d is just amazing

PiratePenguin 03-01-2013 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atrip25 (Post 57914612)
I have a Canon EOS 20D camera with a 15-85mm lens. I was thinking about selling it and upgrading to a ti3 or ti4. You think I would get more benefit from a better lens or upgrading my camera?

What do you want to do that your current setup cant do?

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atrip25 (Post 57914612)
I have a Canon EOS 20D camera with a 15-85mm lens. I was thinking about selling it and upgrading to a ti3 or ti4. You think I would get more benefit from a better lens or upgrading my camera?

The 20D is your bottleneck in that scenario--the 15-85mm is a phenomenal lens. The T3i or T4i (T2i has same sensor) would pair nicely with the 15-85mm. I would not recommend downgrading from the 15-85mm, but the 18-55 IS lenses are still quite good.

sniperruff 03-01-2013 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nizzy1115 (Post 57914694)
What do you want to do that your current setup cant do?

I hereby vote this as the answer of the century to every digital photography question.

XReflection 03-01-2013 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by postwar (Post 57911430)
I've been doing photography for a while and used that 50 in weddings. I know for sure the 50 isn't a real macro so I agree with you XR. I think they in fact do make the 50 in a macro model, but a simple google search said slap on an extension tube and you have a macro lens. not sure exactly what those are, I should but don't. I think I googled "canon 50 1.8 macro" and found that answer.

nifty fifty is great for portraits and medium distance shots. Sadly I haven't really used mine because I have a great Tokina 35mm f2.8 macro that does just as well with portraits. It's my walk around lens.

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XReflection (Post 57915374)
nifty fifty is great for portraits and medium distance shots. Sadly I haven't really used mine because I have a great Tokina 35mm f2.8 macro that does just as well with portraits. It's my walk around lens.

I've heard about that, just about the cheapest 1:1 macro lens on the market. I'd like to try it myself, but I've already got a glut of lenses in the 35mm range. How's it compare with other lenses you've used?

XReflection 03-01-2013 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57915748)
I've heard about that, just about the cheapest 1:1 macro lens on the market. I'd like to try it myself, but I've already got a glut of lenses in the 35mm range. How's it compare with other lenses you've used?

Can't say I have much experience (I only own 3 lenses total including that one). But the images are sharp, and it does pretty well as a landscape/general purpose lens. Sometimes I wish it was a tad bit faster, but overall its been a great lens. I got it as my first lens because I bought my body (40D) used without the kit lens per recommendation of my friend.

In terms of the build of the lens, the Tokina is solid. It's made of metal, so obviously compared to the nifty fifty, it's hardly a contest. I also have the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 but that has been a very situational lens for me and I rarely use it unless I know I will need it (i.e. parade or something similar).

fyu 03-01-2013 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57915748)
I've heard about that, just about the cheapest 1:1 macro lens on the market. I'd like to try it myself, but I've already got a glut of lenses in the 35mm range. How's it compare with other lenses you've used?

AF is loud. but it's a great value. discontinued so may become harder to find.

XReflection 03-01-2013 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fyu (Post 57916786)
AF is loud. but it's a great value. discontinued so may become harder to find.

It's not too bad. Nifty fifty is like 3x louder, haha.

iancole 03-01-2013 11:49 AM

Dead.

123123mail 03-01-2013 11:49 AM

Is the deal dead? I tried adding it to the cart, it is still showing $324. Am I doing anything wrong?

preppyak 03-01-2013 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atrip25 (Post 57914612)
I have a Canon EOS 20D camera with a 15-85mm lens. I was thinking about selling it and upgrading to a ti3 or ti4. You think I would get more benefit from a better lens or upgrading my camera?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57914774)
The 20D is your bottleneck in that scenario--the 15-85mm is a phenomenal lens. The T3i or T4i (T2i has same sensor) would pair nicely with the 15-85mm. I would not recommend downgrading from the 15-85mm, but the 18-55 IS lenses are still quite good.

Agreed, as someone who owns a 20D, you'd see the improvement in both MP and general handling by going to a T3i or 60D. I find the 20D infuriating to move between settings, 60D is easy by comparison.

I'd definitely keep the 15-85, as that's the best walk-around you can really get from Canon. With Canon likely updating the 60D soon, I'd say see if you can get a cheap deal on a 60D body, or, if you want, wait and see what the 70D might look like.

Cyrix2k 03-01-2013 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DocMo (Post 57910622)
I gotta admit... The 50 1.8 on my T4i is soft at a variety of stops. Not sure if I have a bum copy or not. The 40, on the other hand, is very nice!! :nod:

I'm going FF soon and I'll see how the 50 looks when that time comes (maybe it will benefit from the focus adjustment). If not, then I'll either send it to Canon for calibration or sell it.

I HATED my nifty fifty. The IQ when it hit focus was good for the price, but the build is so poor it would rarely nail focus anywhere near wide open. At least on mine, it wasn't the body because the focus was sometimes too near and other times too far. On top of that, it was noisy and felt cheap. I ended up mounting a manual focus 50mm f/1.8 from a film body and using that instead with much better results. A couple years ago I shot with my friend's 50mm f/1.4 USM and fell in love so I bought the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 and haven't looked back. I also agree the 50 is too long on a crop body, but I have a 5D and love the focal length. If I were a newbie, I would seriously look at that 40mm pancake posted above. Buying cheap lenses is bound to be a mistake because it makes photography a chore rather than fun.

memarr7 03-01-2013 12:25 PM

Wow....I have a lot to learn about lenses.
It's like a foreign language with you guys!

NKDigoxin 03-01-2013 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57911264)
There is no such thing as a Canon 70-300mm without IS. However, of all the 75-300mm models, the "most recommended" version is the IS version that was only sold in Europe.

Isn't this telephoto lens deal non IS? Im not sure what you are talking about

cvesper 03-01-2013 12:50 PM

Dead...

cervantez015 03-01-2013 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soxela (Post 57908532)
How come recently all the deals have been on canon lenses and non for a nikon....?

I thought this was common knowledge.

AkumaX 03-01-2013 01:10 PM

Is there even a market for 75-300?

Psychs 03-01-2013 01:43 PM

I just got the T4i with 18-135 STM, and 55-250. Is a refurb 40 pancake for $130 worth it? Benefits?

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ColtsFan18 (Post 57918452)
Isn't this telephoto lens deal non IS? Im not sure what you are talking about

The IS version has been out of production for years now. It seemed like you were confusing the 75-300 with the 70-300. There is no such thing as a non-IS version of a Canon 70-300

Quote:

Originally Posted by AkumaX (Post 57919440)
Is there even a market for 75-300?

Paper weights, or hollowed out for use as mugs.

usboy 03-01-2013 02:06 PM

Looks like it is dead. Does not drop the price on adding to cart

jdnt 03-01-2013 02:11 PM

Thanks OP! Bought and Repped earlier. Glad I didn't hesitate this morning.

asuchemist 03-01-2013 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jer-Bear20 (Post 57906138)
I'm a noob with cameras. I have a T4i with a 18-55 and 55-250 both IS lenses. Is this worth it for me to pick up to have a few extra lenses?

No save your money for a good lens. I just sold my 50 1.8.

trying to save up for EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

AkumaX 03-01-2013 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57920844)
The IS version has been out of production for years now. It seemed like you were confusing the 75-300 with the 70-300. There is no such thing as a non-IS version of a Canon 70-300


Paper weights, or hollowed out for use as mugs.

I... I'd be interested in a tutorial for that... :D

LucaBella 03-01-2013 02:30 PM

Well, looks like I've just missed it, but does anyone have any new user recommendations for lenses?

Also, how did you guys learn to shoot, a class or what? I've had a couple DSLRs, and am currently owning (but never really using) a Canon XSi... I want to mostly take pics of the kids, or maybe a great scene somewhere, but all I have is the kit lens... Someone point me in a better direction now that I've got a few bucks to spend...

gder03 03-01-2013 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spidrw (Post 57907084)
Even with the 2.8 aperture on the 40 versus 1.8 on the 50?

don't listen to that guy. choose which ever lens that fits yoyur needs. ones sharper, one better for low light.
Here is the MTF: http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-con...75x194.jpg

its sharper. but it costs more and is worse in low light. the 50mm will get about 50% more light and has better bokeh (still pretty ugly bokeh imo). If you are thinking of a 40mm, I'd just pony up a little more and get a 50mm 1.4. It focuses faster, is even better in low light, and has a nice focus ring.

bighonker 03-01-2013 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LucaBella (Post 57921636)
Well, looks like I've just missed it, but does anyone have any new user recommendations for lenses?

Also, how did you guys learn to shoot, a class or what? I've had a couple DSLRs, and am currently owning (but never really using) a Canon XSi... I want to mostly take pics of the kids, or maybe a great scene somewhere, but all I have is the kit lens... Someone point me in a better direction now that I've got a few bucks to spend...

Wait for another deal on the 55-250 IS lens. Lots of bang for the buck. Next would be the 40 2.8 STM pancake. It's better than the wildly popular 50 1.8

msf 03-01-2013 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bestco (Post 57904058)
are these good for macro shots?

You can turn the lens around so its backwards and get extremely close to a subject! You can buy mounts so you dont have to hold it to the camera for fairly cheap on ebay. The only problem is the lighting, if you dont have enough ambient light then a ring light would come in handy for this, the on camera flash wont reach the subject and isnt ideal any ways. :)

I have the 75-300, almost never use it unless I really need that extra reach, and I never go beyond 200mm on it, thats when you get the distortion that this lens is known for.

I wish I went for the 55-250 back in the day, now im saving up for the 70-200 F2.8 usm is. :)

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AkumaX (Post 57921514)
I... I'd be interested in a tutorial for that... :D

It's been done. I've seen a thread or two dedicated to such abominations on photography forums. I'm sure it's a lot of work though--and not sure I'd want to drink from something that had plenty of oil/grease inside :)

blunky 03-01-2013 03:21 PM

Wow not sure why Canon is even still selling the 75-300. It's terrible.

KIRSYSCREATIONS 03-01-2013 04:39 PM

doesn't matter even after it is in the cart and you try to check out the price is Total: $346.68 with tax in NJ.

::dead::

LucaBella 03-01-2013 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bighonker (Post 57921918)
Wait for another deal on the 55-250 IS lens. Lots of bang for the buck. Next would be the 40 2.8 STM pancake. It's better than the wildly popular 50 1.8


you feel that this is a good lens for everyday shots of kids? it's on sale at Worst Buy for $232 but I have $100 in rewards....

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LucaBella (Post 57925600)
you feel that this is a good lens for everyday shots of kids? it's on sale at Worst Buy for $232 but I have $100 in rewards....

Just a few days ago during the canon refurbished sale (20% off), the price was under $150 for the 55-250. It's over now.

I regularly see the lens available used on photography forums and ebay for less than $150. I'd personally just skip the warranty and save $80+.

MOkoFOko 03-01-2013 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blunky (Post 57922824)
Wow not sure why Canon is even still selling the 75-300. It's terrible.

Just turrible

*Cleveland Brown shakes head disapprovingly*

msf 03-01-2013 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blunky (Post 57922824)
Wow not sure why Canon is even still selling the 75-300. It's terrible.

Probably to make money, someone buys this, isnt happen, then buys the next one up. :D

atrocitythug 03-01-2013 09:21 PM

Noob when it comes to Cameras if someone could answer a few questions I'd appreciated it.

Bought my mom a Nikon D5100 with stock lens.

Whats a good all around size lens that would be good enough that she can take pretty much any picture she will want, without breakn the bank.

Maybe a 70-300mm?

AkumaX 03-01-2013 11:14 PM

I'd be interested in hearing anyone's opinion re: 35mm f/2.0 vs 40mm f/2.8, when paired with a FF (5D2 or 6D)

My only request is that price is not considered a factor in this comparison

LucaBella 03-02-2013 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOkoFOko (Post 57927608)
Just a few days ago during the canon refurbished sale (20% off), the price was under $150 for the 55-250. It's over now.

I regularly see the lens available used on photography forums and ebay for less than $150. I'd personally just skip the warranty and save $80+.


Well, at your advice, I went to amazon to look at the used/refurbs they have on this, and found a seller with a great rep who claimed it was brand new in box with paperwork and caps for $165 so here's hoping all goes well.

Thanks and Repped!

lancelee80 03-06-2013 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jer-Bear20 (Post 57906138)
I'm a noob with cameras. I have a T4i with a 18-55 and 55-250 both IS lenses. Is this worth it for me to pick up to have a few extra lenses?

Yes, your camera works with any EF, EF-S lens.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:37 AM.


1999-2014