55-250 vs 50mm 1.8

[joel222]

I know they are two totally different lenses, but I'm getting sharper shots from the zoom lens at 55mm than I do from the prime. I thought it should of been the other way around. Now I'm starting to wonder what use is the 50mm 1.8 apart from dof?

 

[Wozzaaah]

The 55-250 is a belter of a lens but you should still be getting nice shots with the 1.8, what aperture are you using it at?

 

[joel222]

I took some pics today at 2.8, and yes they are nice shots. I then swapped to the 55-250 and there is a slight difference in sharpness, the zoom giving slightly better quality.

 

[seriousrikk]

What shutter speed?

If your shutter speed is too low the zoom IS could be helping out there.

 

[joel222]

Shutter speeds have been between 1/90 and 1/500, as I was experimenting with iso to see how far I could raise it. To be honest between the shutter speeds used I didn't see any difference in sharpness but there was a little noise on iso 400, but not a lot.

 

[Lunawolfy]

aperture as well?

3.5 would be sharper than 1.8?

 

[LongLensPhotography]

The prime is awful at 1.8, but at f/4 it should be super sharp, unless focusing is off. It is not the most accurate lens in the world, but technique can play a role too.

 

[ant1]

I get very sharp images with both my primes, 50mm 1.8 and also my 28mm 2.8.
You say you took the pictures at 2.8 yet they would be sharper at f/4 obviously, also you can't compare it if they are taken with different f/stops in my opinion. Set the prime to f/4 and the 55-250 at 55 f/4 as that's the lowest? Also turn off IS and see if there is any difference

If not, then who knows aha.