Future of Canon M Series - Invest or Sell?

nnowak wrote:

Alexis wrote:

Is the EF-S 55-250 that much better than the EF-M 55-200 to warrant the extra weight of lens and adaptor?

At least with the copies I had, the EF-M 55-200mm was noticeably softer at the long end than the 55-250mm STM. Not surprisingly, my 70-200mm f/4 IS L was better than the 55-250mm STM and my 70-200mm f/2.8 IS L II was better than the f/4 version. Besides sharpness, contrast and color improved as you went up in size/price of the lenses. My EF-M 55-200mm was purchased new on initial release and the other three lenses mentioned above were refurbs direct from Canon.

Thanks for the response to the question that I originally asked R2D2 about EF-M55-200 vs. EF-S 55-250. My experience with some of the above-mentioned lenses is a little different to yours. My EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS was indeed better IQ than the cheaper EF 70-200 f/4L IS, but the 70-400 f/4L is not "two levels" better than the EF-M as you infer above, with the EF-S 55-250 sitting somewhere in between the EF70-200f4L and the EFM55-200.

When I first bought the EF-M 55-200 I still owned the 70-200 f/4L IS and thought that I would be keeping the latter because of its superior quality but barely a month after I bought the EF-M I realised that the quality difference between them was negligible and sold the EF lens, so unless I had an extraordinarily good copy of trhe EF-M 55-200, I cannot see why people are by-passing this lens and buying the EF-S 55-250 instead.

Here is a comparison of the EF 70-200 f/4L IS vs. EF-M 55-200 IS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-XAOyA5oe8