This seems similar to the lens Woot offered on March 21. However, that lens was originally listed as model 8546B003, while nearly every other seller was offering model 8546B002. It led some of us to question whether the listed product was the regular USA SKU.
Fast forward to this Woot, and the URL looks like just round 2 of the March 21 listing - but with the ubiquitous USA model number 8546B002. Mysteriously (some might say, unsettlingly), the March 21 listing now shows model 8546B002 as well.
Was Woot selling the 8546B002 all along, and listed 8546B003 in error on March 21? Or did they see that users noticed the difference and try to cover it up, but they actually sold (and continue to sell) the mysteriously rare 8546B003? In other words, are there Wootigans going on?
Perhaps some customers who bought the March 21 deal can tell us which model they received? And do it in a way that we believe they are authentic customers? Stay tuned.
Since many of these items come from Amazon, and Amazon is a global company, it’s hard to differentiate “grey market” camera gear anymore. I do wish electronics makers (including camera makers) would stop this practice. It’s all the same part.
Regardless of where it came from, what I understand if it’s not a “for the USA” version, you simple just ship it back to the country/region that it was for.
I’ve bought grey market before, and luckily it happened to be a For the USA version, and it’s successfully registered with Canon USA.
Aside from that, outside of it’s original 1 year warranty… you’re most likely to take it to a camera store to get these things fixed anyway, so it wont even matter where it’s from since camera stores fix everything from everywhere.
I bought one and when it arrived it was a usa lens .They must have made an error with the original post but they seem to have corrected it .
I don’t have these two lenses, but I have had older generations of both.
They aren’t great lenses, but, if you are happy with the quality of the kit lens that came with your cameras, either of these should be good enough, especially for the price.
The 75-300 will work with any Canon camera since they went to EF autofocus lenses a couple of decades ago.
The 55-250 will only work with small sensor digital cameras. If you don’t know which size sensor your camera has then it’s a small sensor and will work with this lens. The 1D, 5D, and 6D will not.
The 55-250 has image stabilization; the 75-300 does not. IS helps you shoot stationary stuff at the full focal length without a tripod. It is not a substitute for a larger aperture when shooting moving things, like sports, since you still need a lower shutter speed.
If you want to shoot moving stuff like sports you are going to have to temper your expectations. Don’t expect to get sharp photos that freeze the action. With a tripod or with the IS lens and with practice and a steady hand you may be able to get just appropriate motion blurring, which can still make for a pleasant picture.
I just went digging through my Flickr account looking for examples, but I don’t have any. I no longer have the 75-300, and I don’t use the 55-250. I’ve got a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 I use most of the time and an ancient Canon 100-300 f/4.5-5.6 for when I want a little more reach or my arm is tired.
I have both of these lenses to use with my Rebel T5i. I use the 55-250 mm quite a bit, and I’m very happy with it. Focusing is quick & quiet, and I’m perfectly happy with the image quality.
The EF 75-300, on the other hand, is a purchase I’m not nearly as happy with. I had no idea how much the image stabilization on my 55-250 was helping me out until I tried shooting with this lens, which has no stabilization. I don’t even keep it in my camera bag anymore – the extra 50 mm of zoom I get isn’t worth the space & weight. Maybe it would be okay if you are pretty much always shooting from a tripod.
I would qualify that further to state that if you’re shooting daytime outdoors the Image Stabilization won’t matter much. IS only makes a real difference when your shutter speed falls below “1/[focal length in mm]” (i.e. 1/300th at max focal length for this lens). Most daylight shooting can be done at higher shutter speeds than this. For instance, 1/1000,F8,ISO400 is not uncommon daytime settings.
In my case, it was while on vacation in Costa Rica, trying to take pictures in some of the parks. Technically outdoor shooting, but fairly low-light due to the jungle canopy. I was hand-holding the camera instead of hiking around with a tripod, and the images I took with my 55-250 were noticeably better than those with the 75-300. As you pointed out, these were situations with a relatively low shutter speed.
I own both of these lenses, though admittedly, the 55-250 that I possess is the old version I without STM. I’m relatively certain that they’re optically very similar, however.
With that said, I urge anyone reading this and weighing these two against each other to NOT buy the 75-300. The 55-250 was my first DSLR lens and has fantastic image quality and superb image stabilization. Stopped down to f/8 or greater, it’s very sharp.
The 75-300, on the other hand, is complete garbage. I actually bought it recently second-hand for less than $100 as a collector’s item and as a demonstration of what qualities to avoid in a lens. Its worst property is absolutely uncontrollable chromatic aberration (CA). Unlike simple perspective distortions, CA is very difficult to correct in post. Narrow apertures can help to avoid CA, but the lens really never approaches the 55-250.
I really hope this is informative to potential buyers. The STM is a brand new design of a proven optical formula with great build quality. The 75-300 is an ancient piece of junk desperately in need of a refresh. Obviously, if you have a full frame camera, it’s your only choice, but with Canon’s entry-level FF body running $1600, you’d be insane pairing it with a $100 lens anyway.
Waiting for woot of a ‘L’ series lens. (In my dreams)