Reading mode: Light Dark

55-250 IS and 70-300 IS owners opinions

Go to last post
A

Aaron@Utah

Senior Member
Messages
1,650
Reaction score
94
Location
US
I would like the opinions of those that have both of these lenses

I am an owner of the 70-300 IS but have recently acquired a used 70-200 2.8 non-IS and am wondering if I should keep the 70-300 IS or sell it and replace it with the 55-250 IS
I and not woried about build since all serious work would be done with the

70-200 L anyway I do like the compactness of the 55-250 for using when I dont want to lug around the bigger L 2.8
I have looked at a lot of the samples on pbase for both lense and
am really leaning to replacing the 70-300 IS with the smaller cheaper 55-250 IS
for the owners of both have any reasons why I should not

--
Mac OS X: Because making UNIX user friendly was easier than fixing Windows.
 
I bought a 70-300 IS for my wife and didn't really care for it so I returned it and later got a 70-200 f4 L IS which is outstanding. I tried again and got my wife a 55-250 IS and I really like it much better and for less $.
 
Aaron@Utah said:
I would like the opinions of those that have both of these lenses

I am an owner of the 70-300 IS but have recently acquired a used
70-200 2.8 non-IS and am wondering if I should keep the 70-300 IS
or sell it and replace it with the 55-250 IS
I and not woried about build since all serious work would be done
with the
70-200 L anyway I do like the compactness of the 55-250 for using
when I dont want to lug around the bigger L 2.8
I have looked at a lot of the samples on pbase for both lense and
am really leaning to replacing the 70-300 IS with the smaller cheaper
55-250 IS
for the owners of both have any reasons why I should not

--
Mac OS X: Because making UNIX user friendly was easier than fixing
Windows.
Click to expand...
I tried both and found that the 55-250 has better IQ up to about 110-120mm and the 70-300 has better IQ on the long end.

I ended up staying with the 55-250 based on compact size/weight and price.
 
Your comparison has been addressed before, here and other places. The general consensus has been that the 70-300IS USM is the better of the two; anywhere from "considerably" so to marginally so. Seldom has the 55-250 emerged the "winner". I'm just calling it the way I've seen it. The 70-300IS is a bit heavier, though....if that makes a difference.
 
Can you show me an example of the 55-250 at the long end?
 
I took the 40D & 55-250 IS to the zoo on Saturday. I tested with many shots wide open and the images were very good. The images are sharp, in focus, with good color and contrast.

I even took some birds in flight shots of ducks with the lens. The lens had no problem focusing on flying ducks.

I use L lenses on my 5D. But I am very impressed with the 18-55 & 55-250 IS lenses on the 40D. Canon did a fantastic job on this lens at an affordable price.

DPP can correct lens distortion easily using the tune button.

--

Canon EOS 5D & 40Ds, Albuquerque NM - contact me if you are local and want to take some pics
 
My oppinion is that I owned the 55-250 for about a week before I took it back and ordered a 70-300 IS (refurbished)

I got the later a few hrs ago, and am very happy with my decision. The focus is far faster, I really like the extra bit of reach, and it feels a lot better mounted on my 40d.

I didn't mind the build of the 55-250 on my 350d, but it felt akward and hard to handle on the larger body.
 
wow check out the heat in the background
 
I love my 55-250 IS.
Heres some examples of the 55-250 IS at 250 mm:

Wide open:



f/8:



f/8:



Slightly oversharpened f/8:



Best lens in that pricerange.

--
Asus P5B Deluxe - Antec Nine Hundred
Q6600 KentsField
ASUS 8800 GTX - NorthQ Giant Reactor 1000W
2x1024 Cellshock PC6400 CL4 - X-Fi Xtreme Gamer
300 Gb Seagate 7200.7 IDE
2x250 GB Samsung SP2504C RAID 0
 
I just got the 55-250 a couple of weeks ago. I cannot add too much to all the standard reviews, I mean this thing has been talked about to death. So I will give a little confirmation of some of the things I saw in the reviews:

Plastic lens mount: while I was not too sure why this makes any difference for people that are careful with their equipment, I fully understand the argument that the plastic lens mount is less precise. Again, how important is that: I don't know.

Slow focusing: seemed like a big deal at first but I either grew used to it quickly or it got faster after a little loosening up.

Vignette: more pronounced than I thought it would be. As a hobby photog, I did not fully evaluate some of the charts that would have shown me how much there is. Worse is that as soon as I put a filter on the lens, there is a little more vignetting.

Storage bag: Why could canon not put a $2.50 bag in with this lens. Everything is about cheap these days.

Speed: I'm tired of slow lenses. Or maybe canon should make their cameras take quality photos at iso 1600. If they would do away with the ISO less than 400 and tune these to a higher range, I think this would be a non issue for me. I dont know if they can do that though, I'm just talking out my butt here.

Focal range: I'm almost sorry that I did not buy a set of lenses with some overlap. Changing lenses is quite a pain.

Image quality: I'm quite happy with this. And this is what the lens is all about.

Price: you get what you pay for. OK in this case you get a little more than what you pay for. I think this lens would be fair at a higher price but IMO that would have caused me to buy an L series lens.

Again, these are just some opinions of a 55-250 hobbiest. Most of my pictures are snapshots with a nice camera. I'm just trying to be better without spending a lot. Hence this lens selection. I guess I would do it again.
 
I sold off the 70-300 and picked up a 55-250 IS today
so far I am very pleased build quality is not as bad as I had anticipated
and focus speed is ok for what I will be using it for
overall I am pleased and have no regrets trading the 70-300mm for the 55-250
the more compact size was the kicker for me

I just wish canon would get on the ball and get a 17/18-200 IS to market
I would love to have just one lens for travel hiking and all around use
when I dont want to carry the whole bag of lenses with me
I can deal with the compromises to have the one lense convience

all the other lenses I have are specialized lenses anyway
mostly fast primes, a macro and then the 70-200 2.8L

thanks for your advice and opinions

--
Mac OS X: Because making UNIX user friendly was easier than fixing Windows.
 
I own a 70-300APO DG and i'd really like IS, I was seriously considering the 70-300IS. Hearing you have sold yours for the 55-250mm is interesting. How do they compare image quality wise? What do you think of the image quality at 250mm?

Thanks
Aaron@Utah said:
I sold off the 70-300 and picked up a 55-250 IS today
so far I am very pleased build quality is not as bad as I had
anticipated
and focus speed is ok for what I will be using it for
overall I am pleased and have no regrets trading the 70-300mm for the
55-250
the more compact size was the kicker for me

I just wish canon would get on the ball and get a 17/18-200 IS to market
I would love to have just one lens for travel hiking and all around use
when I dont want to carry the whole bag of lenses with me
I can deal with the compromises to have the one lense convience

all the other lenses I have are specialized lenses anyway
mostly fast primes, a macro and then the 70-200 2.8L

thanks for your advice and opinions

--
Mac OS X: Because making UNIX user friendly was easier than fixing
Windows.
Click to expand...
 
I would say the 70-300 still has the edge in IQ at the longer end so if this will be your only lense in this range and you need the best you can buy without going to the pro lenses
I would suggest the 70-300 but since I have the 70-200 2.8
for any serious work this was not an issue for me
overall I think the 55-250 is about 90-95% of the 70-300
the focus is a bit slower overall and the IQ on the long end
is not up to the 70-300 but I knew this when buying the
55-250 so it was not an issue for me

I like the smaller lighter 55-250 for my needs
2stepsteve said:
Thanks
Aaron@Utah said:
I sold off the 70-300 and picked up a 55-250 IS today
so far I am very pleased build quality is not as bad as I had
anticipated
and focus speed is ok for what I will be using it for
overall I am pleased and have no regrets trading the 70-300mm for the
55-250
the more compact size was the kicker for me

I just wish canon would get on the ball and get a 17/18-200 IS to market
I would love to have just one lens for travel hiking and all around use
when I dont want to carry the whole bag of lenses with me
I can deal with the compromises to have the one lense convience

all the other lenses I have are specialized lenses anyway
mostly fast primes, a macro and then the 70-200 2.8L

thanks for your advice and opinions

--
Mac OS X: Because making UNIX user friendly was easier than fixing
Windows.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Mac OS X: Because making UNIX user friendly was easier than fixing Windows.
 
Hello,

I wanted a compact, light telezoom, and not too expensive. I could not believe it when I saw the price of the 55-250IS, and the first reviews !
So I bought it.

Sometimes it does not focus right, but the more I use it, the more it focuses ok, so maybe it is just a matter on knowing how to focus properly, on good contrasty targets ;)

It seem to really shine around 110mm. I got incredibly sharp photos at that setting.

Also, I really really appreciate it starts from 55 and not 70. 70mm was meant for FullFrame, and is a bit long on a crop body.

I own a 75-300 and I rearely used it because I could not leave it on, except for real "tele" shots. With the 55-250, I can leave it on all the time if I simply want to take photos of my daughter for example.
 
Good set of opinions. I'm surprised more people have not noticed the benefit of 55 mm on this lens. The 70-xxx lenses were, as you point out, designed for full frame cameras. We're only just now starting to get lenses where the focal length ranges are adjusted for 1.6x crop factors. Even 55 mm is a little long as 70 divided by 1.6 is 44 mm. A 40-200 f/3.5-4.5 (64-320 equivalent) would be an excellent lens for my 30D and I wouldn't care if it had IS or not.
--
Jerry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top