Canon 55-250 IS vs Tamron 70-300 VC

vickylou

vickylou

Messages
246
Name
Vicky
Edit My Images
Yes
I am looking for a budget telephoto to give me some more reach. Mainly to get some shots of my toddler from a distance rather. I could afford a used Olympus 55-250 IS now or should I wait and save for the Tamron? is it worth the extra money in terms of IQ, IS/VC, distortions, CA? At which focal length do they loose F4? Should I also consider the Canon70-300 IS (non-L)? Unfortunately there is nooooo way my budget would allow for the Canon 70-200 F4 IS :(, will keep playing the lotto!

Has anyone compared these, I know they are not fast telephotos but I will probably use the lens outside in relatively reasonable light, and I have a speedlight if I use indoors. What do you think? Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Can't speak for the tamron but for the money the canon 55-250 is a cracking lens use mine a lot always try to keep it just off the 250
 
I've had the 70-300 is for several years. From 70 to 200 mm it's really rather good, it's a bit softer from 200 - 300 mm, oh and needs good light as it's a bit slow.

It's a great lens for candid family shots and the IS is superb, athough it's 300 mm it's no wildlife lens.
 
I might be wrong, but isn't the 70-300 VC one of Tammy's newer lenses? as in only released this year/late last year?

If its the lens I'm thinking of, then its apparently as good as/better (on crop cameras) then Nikon's own 70-300 VR, so should be better then the budget Canon offering?
 
Yes the Tamron VC lens is a recent release. I've had mine for a year and find it an excellent piece of glass for the money. It compares very favourably with Nikon's equivalent which I also looked at so I can't talk about comparisons with Canon.
 
Having owned both I'd say go with the 70-300 VC if you have the extra cash - check my flickr sets - 70-300 VC - 55-250 IS - if you want real world images from the same person :)

The main reason I say the VC is that - the VC, its very very good.
 
vickylou said:
I am looking for a budget telephoto to give me some more reach. Mainly to get some shots of my toddler from a distance rather. I could afford a used 55-250 IS now or should I wait and save for the Tamron? is it worth the extra money in terms of IQ, IS/VC, distortions, CA? At which focal length do they loose F4? Should I also consider the Canon 70-300 IS (non-L)? Unfortunately there is nooooo way my budget would allow for the 70-200 F4 IS :(, will keep playing the lotto!

Has anyone compared these, I know they are not fast telephotos but I will probably use the lens outside in relatively reasonable light, and I have a speedlight if I use indoors. What do you think? Thank you.
Click to expand...

Tamron 70-300 VC beats the living life out of the canon 55-250! Just sold my 55-250 as I too have 2 kids and that lens is no good with kids. The canon 55-250 is slow to focus and not that great IQ but the Tamron it's in a different class the VC on the 70-300 is better than Nikon's VR and better than canon's IS on the 70-300 lenses ( not including the L). Tamron is sharper than the 55-250, has a faster AF and better IQ. Full time manual override and front element doesent' rotate. Amazon are doing the tamron for £280 at the moment. I have used both lenses and the clear winner is the Tamron without a shadow of a doubt! ...
 
vickylou said:
I am looking for a budget telephoto to give me some more reach. Mainly to get some shots of my toddler from a distance rather. I could afford a used 55-250 IS now or should I wait and save for the Tamron? is it worth the extra money in terms of IQ, IS/VC, distortions, CA? At which focal length do they loose F4? Should I also consider the Canon 70-300 IS (non-L)? Unfortunately there is nooooo way my budget would allow for the 70-200 F4 IS :(, will keep playing the lotto!

Has anyone compared these, I know they are not fast telephotos but I will probably use the lens outside in relatively reasonable light, and I have a speedlight if I use indoors. What do you think? Thank you.
Click to expand...

I've not had experience with the Tamron lens - it appears from the above posts it's a good lens and def worth a consider. From a price point of view, it falls in the middle of the 2 Canon lenses.

The 55-250IS is a great lens and very well regarded, my daughter has one and loves it, gets very nice shots with it, can be picked up new for around £140-150.

An additional £100 ish, brings the Tamron lens and another additional £100 ish, brings the Canon 70-300IS lens - I have this and am very happy with it, not as good as an L, but then doesn't carry the price tag of it either. It is quicker to focus, has the slightly extra reach over the 55-250IS (but looses some wide angle) and is a very capable lens, I'm very happy with mine. It is twice the price of the 55-250IS model, so there are obviously going to be some differences.

One last thing to remember is weight, can't comment on the Tamron, but the 70-300 weighs a lot more than the 55-250.

Hope this is of some help :thumbs:
 
I had both, canon 55-250 and tamron 70-300 VC, I gave away the canon to my niece and kept the Tamron as it is far superior.Yes it is a bit soft at 300 but it is no worse than the canon 55-250 or 70-300 if not better. At other focal lengths it is really good, sharp and beautiful colors. I used it mostly for air shows and headshots and for the latter it is brilliant. At f4 of course it is slower than others at 2.8 :-) (obviosuly) but if you have twice the money then go for 2.8. at £380 it is the best value for money in its class (NON L).

The Canon one you can pick it up at around £140 and it is a good value for money but save that little extra and get the Tamron's. The VC is fantastic, it literally freezes the image in your view finder (at least my copy) and very sharp from 70-250 and it is also much better build and as such a little heavier.

My 2 pences...
 
Georges said:
I had both, canon 55-250 and tamron 70-300 VC, I gave away the canon to my niece and kept the Tamron as it is far superior.Yes it is a bit soft at 300 but it is no worse than the canon 55-250 or 70-300 if not better. At other focal lengths it is really good, sharp and beautiful colors. I used it mostly for air shows and headshots and for the latter it is brilliant. At f4 of course it is slower than others at 2.8 :-) (obviosuly) but if you have twice the money then go for 2.8. at £380 it is the best value for money in its class (NON L).

The Canon one you can pick it up at around £140 and it is a good value for money but save that little extra and get the Tamron's. The VC is fantastic, it literally freezes the image in your view finder (at least my copy) and very sharp from 70-250 and it is also much better build and as such a little heavier.

My 2 pences...
Click to expand...
:thumbs: but amazon do it for £280:bonk:
 
Now I am confused, when this message was written everything said Canon not Olympus!!!!! every time I change it it changes back??????????
 
And I fell for it lol!
 
I have the canon 55-250, I'd always go for canon if you could afford it !
 
Yes, but you have to look like for like - I'm not 100% sure what the canon equivalent is but I would guess either the 70-200 IS (£899.00) or 70-300 IS (£379.00).

By the way I can't believe how much the price on this had dropped - I got mine at £350 and the price never shifted, now its £285! Damn!

Oh, and don;t forget the Tamron is full frame compatible, as are the Canon 70-200 and 300's, but not the 55-250 - now you might not think that important and it may well never be for you, but that's what I thought and had to sell on some damn good lenses to match my body.
 
Last edited:
Tamron SP 70-300mm DI VC is a very good lens which gives some real good sharp immages, i nearly kept it but didnt like the noisy VC but its something i'm sure you can get used too and the zoom barel was a little too stiff for my likeing. But for around £300 its very good value with the XD low dispersal glass.

If your wondering what i got instead i pushed the boat out and got the canon 70-300mm L which is in a class of its own but costs alot more.

Good luck get the Tammy you wont regret it.
 
In short - range and the lack of IS\VC - that said it is a very good lens and depending on what you're shooting you may not even need IS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top