Reading mode: Light Dark

Best superzoom for a Canon EOS 550D?

Go to last post
L

lattesweden

Veteran Member
Messages
6,093
Solutions
7
Reaction score
3,904
Hi!

I use micro four thirds myself so I don't have much experience with Canon, but hope you can help me for a friends sake.

He has a Canon EOS 550D and a Canon EF-S 55-250mm and a 18-55 mm lens. He has been looking at replacing his lenses with a Tamron 16-300 superzoom so that he doesn't need to switch lenses. He is not a pixel peeper but doesn't want worse quality than what he gets from his current lenses.

When I looked at some reviews, the Tamron didn't recieve the best scores, especially at the long end. Is there another superzoom he should consider more?

Thanks for the help!
 
I'm using the Canon T2i (550D) camera and I haven't heard of a good enough superzoom that would suit me. But some people feel the Tamron 18-270mm lens is adequate.

Here's Dpreview's review on it.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_18-270_3p5-6p3_vc_n15/

What I did was buy another Canon T2i (550D) camera and put lenses on them both. I bring two or more combinations with me on my photography trips, so I don't change lenses either.
 
Last edited:
lattesweden said:
Hi!

I use micro four thirds myself so I don't have much experience with Canon, but hope you can help me for a friends sake.

He has a Canon EOS 550D and a Canon EF-S 55-250mm and a 18-55 mm lens. He has been looking at replacing his lenses with a Tamron 16-300 superzoom so that he doesn't need to switch lenses. He is not a pixel peeper but doesn't want worse quality than what he gets from his current lenses.
Click to expand...
He will sacrifice IQ to make this switch.

The question you should ask is: "What superzoom are you using on your Canon crop body and how do you feel the IQ compares to the kit lenses?"
 
I've had the Tamron 18-270 for a few years and have no complaints. It's not super sharp all over (but if it were no other lenses would ever be sold), focuses well, is light and compact looks pleasingly "lensey". The 16-300 adds full time manual I think?? and closer focusing, a smidgin more reach but is a lot bulkier and and the samples I've seen showed a lot of chromatic aberration at the long end (something that hasn't really been a big issue with the 18-270).

I think since I bought this Sigma have brought out an improved 18-250 and Canon's 18-200 may also have improved.
 
I had the Canon 18-200mm on a 550D for a couple of years, which produced some really great "internet sized" pictures, so if your friend isn't a pixel-peeper, it's an additional lens to consider.

It does have scathing reviews though, but you have to look at it as a "which is least worst" for the price bracket.

I bought mine used, so for the outlay it has been a superb walkabout lens, and mainly because I didn't want to be switching lenses constantly.

I did however find it produced some great macro shots for coins, but really struggled with AF in low light when live-view was used.

Generally "very acceptable" for family holiday pics / days out / etc.

Other notable points would be terrible noise from AF in video mode (no external Mic)

I haven't onwed any of the other superzooms, so I can't make a direct comparison.
 
While not a superzoom, I have used the 18-135 STM and it has surprisingly good IQ, it's light and quiet.

If you want more opinions I suggest you check out this site instead of DPReview.

Loading…

photography-on-the.net
 
I posted some pictures in my gallery of a test of the newer Sigma 18-300. I found there wasn't much difference at 300 than the Canon 70-300L.
 
I'd recommend the Tamron 16-300.

From the sounds of it, he'd get more satisfaction from the wider zoom range (especially at the wide end) than dissatisfaction from the possible lack of sharpness.
 
Any of these lenses are plenty sharp for the 550D. It's only if OP plans to invest in a higher res body at some time in the future that the lens may be limiting. But rather than the amount of detail (because you're zooming to eliminate having to crop) I'd suggest that the overall "look" from the lens is more important, contrast and colour.
 
lattesweden said:
He has a Canon EOS 550D and a Canon EF-S 55-250mm and a 18-55 mm lens. He has been looking at replacing his lenses with a Tamron 16-300 superzoom so that he doesn't need to switch lenses. He is not a pixel peeper but doesn't want worse quality than what he gets from his current lenses.
Click to expand...
He'll definitely give up some performance going to a superzoom. But it all depends on his output requirements (how large he prints and displays, and how much he crops).

I'd second the suggestion to buy the 18-135 STM. Fast AF, dead quiet, good IS. It'll eliminate a lot of lens changes. A very nice lens.

R2

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries
 
Last edited:
lattesweden said:
Hi!

I use micro four thirds myself so I don't have much experience with Canon, but hope you can help me for a friends sake.

He has a Canon EOS 550D and a Canon EF-S 55-250mm and a 18-55 mm lens. He has been looking at replacing his lenses with a Tamron 16-300 superzoom so that he doesn't need to switch lenses. He is not a pixel peeper but doesn't want worse quality than what he gets from his current lenses.

When I looked at some reviews, the Tamron didn't recieve the best scores, especially at the long end. Is there another superzoom he should consider more?
Click to expand...
Today's superzoom compacts can spill out photos with IQ that rivals APS-C. Compacts like Canon's G3 X and Panasonic's FZ1000 seem to be quite decent according to this guy's G3 X review.
 
Yep, that's a legit option. G3X and an EOS-M3 with a nice wide prime (sharing the EVF) would be a nice travel kit requiring no lens changing. If that luminous landscape comparison is repeatable then we could expect (at low ISO) the G3X to get sharper images of distant objects than any of the mentioned lenses fitted to a 550D for about the same price as some of them. (but with less control of depth of field).
 
Can it rival the IQ in rainy and cloudy weather? Can you provide samples or links to show me? Where I live during the rainy season in Oregon, there's times that we don't see the sun for weeks. Years ago I found when using P&S compacts, that I could only take photos during our dry season for the most part. Now, I take photos all the time and sometimes even when it's raining (under an umbrella).

A little edit: I was reviewing the link that you provided and our power went out. I'm now reviewing it again. It's interesting but I was curious about how it looks during low light conditions. I'll keep reviewing....

Another edit: Photographyblog.com said during its review that the Canon G3X is very good, but lacks a built-in viewfinder and "...it still can't match a DSLR or an APS-C equipped compact system camera at the higher ISO speeds...."
 
Last edited:
whakapu said:
Yep, that's a legit option. G3X and an EOS-M3 with a nice wide prime (sharing the EVF) would be a nice travel kit requiring no lens changing. If that luminous landscape comparison is repeatable then we could expect (at low ISO) the G3X to get sharper images of distant objects than any of the mentioned lenses fitted to a 550D for about the same price as some of them. (but with less control of depth of field).
Click to expand...
Being able to share the EVF is a good thing but personally I prefer to have the EVF built-in. Constantly mount and dismount the EVF is as worse as changing lenses. :)
 
Digirame said:
Can it rival the IQ in rainy and cloudy weather? Can you provide samples or links to show me? Where I live during the rainy season in Oregon, there's times that we don't see the sun for weeks. Years ago I found when using P&S compacts, that I could only take photos during our dry season for the most part. Now, I take photos all the time and sometimes even when it's raining (under an umbrella).
Click to expand...
Check out what DPR says in it's review of G1X, G1X II and G7X and samples.
Digirame said:
A little edit: I was reviewing the link that you provided and our power went out. I'm now reviewing it again. It's interesting but I was curious about how it looks during low light conditions. I'll keep reviewing....

Another edit: Photographyblog.com said during its review that the Canon G3X is very good, but lacks a built-in viewfinder and "...it still can't match a DSLR or an APS-C equipped compact system camera at the higher ISO speeds...."
Click to expand...
 
rwl408 said:
Constantly mount and dismount the EVF is as worse as changing lenses. :)
Click to expand...
I don't think I would be changing it constantly. Maybe once at the beginning of a shoot when I know what conditions are.

Lenses OTOH...

R2
 
All about sensor size. The 1" sensor is much bigger than the sensors in most superzooms (like my SX50 which btw easily outresolved my 60D and Tamron 18-270 at the extreme end) but smaller than APS-C or M43. My guess is that you can expect performance 2 stops down from latest gen APS, 1 stop down from MFT. But there are plenty of samples out there. Aperture is also pretty narrow. If you don't really need 600 equiv reach then the Sony or Panasonic version may suit better. They have faster glass so you ISO would be lower.
 
I have used the Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM for a couple of years now since my 18-55 kit lens failed and I now never need to use my Canon 55-250mm anymore. I'm not usually a pixal peeper so haven't really noticed CA issues with most of my images but they don't feel as sharp as my other Canon lenses though in good light I have have some really nice images. The fact that i've been able to catch many images due to the focal length range far outweighs any image quality shortcomings.

The Sigma lens is also quite compact and light for the range it covers, for instance it's smaller and weighs less than Canon's EF-S 15-85mm IS USM which is my usual preferred lens. The 250mm length without having to change lens is most useful!! The optical image stabilisation works well enough though sounds a bit clunky & whirls a bit. Focussing works well too for the most part but recently it's started to 'hunt' a bit more than it used to, but is that an issue with the lens or my camera i can't say. It's not the fastest focussing lens but does the job. When taking video footage the autofocus noise is very noticeable so best to use a different lens for this instance if you can! It doesn't have full-time manual focus - but neither does the Canons' 18-55 & 55-250 as to as regards to any weather sealing. You get a useful lens hood included with the lens unlike 'affordable' Canon lenses. Build quality doesn't feel as tight as Canon but solid enough. It does seriously suffer from zoom creep though when the lens is extended and pointed up or down and can be annoying at times, there is a lock switch but that only works at 18mm where it doesn't usually creep from, a pity they can't have a lock at various focal lengths, e.g. 28, 50, 135, 250 for instance.

There's a review here: http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma-18-250mm-3p5-6p3-os-hsm-macro

Despite it's shortcomings i'm glad i purchased this lens, it continues to be very useful especially for travelling. But of course one always wants more and i've been looking at the Tamron 16-300mm but image quality looks like it could be worse than my Sigma and i'm only willing to sacrifice IQ so far.

Additional edit: Sigma UK are offering £50 cashback on their 18-250mm lens. I don't know if they do a deal in Sweden though... They are also offering cashback on their 18-300mm version of the lens, but it has worse reviews than the Tamron 16-300. The 18-250mm is plenty good enough anyway.
 
Last edited:
lattesweden said:
Hi!

I use micro four thirds myself so I don't have much experience with Canon, but hope you can help me for a friends sake.

He has a Canon EOS 550D and a Canon EF-S 55-250mm and a 18-55 mm lens. He has been looking at replacing his lenses with a Tamron 16-300 superzoom so that he doesn't need to switch lenses. He is not a pixel peeper but doesn't want worse quality than what he gets from his current lenses.

When I looked at some reviews, the Tamron didn't recieve the best scores, especially at the long end. Is there another superzoom he should consider more?

Thanks for the help!
Click to expand...
 
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