Canon 55-250 v 70-200L

P

Photogo!

Messages
189
Name
Pete
Edit My Images
Yes
Morning all!

I'm on the hunt for a zoom for my 550d.. Manly to use as a bit of A walk around for taking closeups of people/places. Ideally id have liked eg an 18-200, but it seems that the iq/sharpness takes too much of a hit with these (please correct me if I'm wrong!).. So im now looking at the 55-250 and 70-200 f4 L. (with/without is).
I was hoping that anyone with experience of both lenses might shed some light on whether the iq differed enough to warrant paying extra for the L or not! Any other suggestions would also be much appreciated.

Cheers,
Pete
 
Main difference apart from image quality will be price, size and weight
Very hard to compare one lens which costs approx £130 s/hand with another that goes for nearer 700 quid (f/4 is)

Of course the 70-200 will be better, no one would buy it otherwise, but you are also paying for weather sealing which isn't too important as your 550D doesn't have it.

Personally think the 55-250mm is an excellent lens and can't be beaten for the money, probably worth double that if you took into account the picture quality. Also think about what you are using it for and by the sounds of it the is will be an important consideration

Strangely enough have just changed from one to the other this weekend, my daughter had the 55-250 and took a cracking shot with it yesterday afternoon also using a 550D.

My opinion would be get the cheaper lens s/hand, use it and see what you reckon then if you want to upgrade will probably get your money back as they always sell easily
 
I can't really add to the above response, other than I have a 55-250mm IS and I would buy a 70-200mm F4 IS if I had the money!

Another point is that the 55-250mm IS is VERY light and makes a great travel lens
 
I've had both, although I used the 55-250 on a 450d and the 70-200 F4IS on a 1D2.

The 55-250 is a great little lens for the money, get one second hand, try it and you shouldn't lose much if you decide to sell it on.

The F4IS is much better build, internal focussing which helps when using filters, is weather sealed and is bigger and heavier. The IQ is superb but the main thing I found over the 55-250 is the focus is much quicker.
 
I have experience of both lenses. Not much to say really. The L lens behaves like the majority of Canon L lenses do. Exceptional in every department. The 55-250 is a nice little lens but not on par with the 70-200 zooms from canon. Yes it's worth the extra if you can afford it.
 
Last edited:
Hi I have both these lens and to be honest the 70-200 means the 55-250 spends most of its time in the bag. The IQ on the 70 - 200 far out ways the 55-250 and its F4 throughout where the 55-250- is at 5.6 at the 250 length. Which in low light makes a big difference on the auto focus. The other problem is as stated if you use a polarising filter or similar with the lens turning on focus you have to focus and then turn the filter to where you need it and if the camera then decides to re focus your back to same problem.
Saying that there is the price difference and the 55-250 is a great lens for the price so if the filter issue or the slow auto focus wont be a problem then save your money and perhaps get a better lens in future?
Hope that helps
Allan
 
I've got the 70-200 f/4L non-IS, and its an incredibly sharp lens. If you dont need IS then it can be had secondhand for not a huge amount more than a new 55-250, so I'd definitely recommend it
 
Ive got the 55-250 lens its a great walk about lens i took it away on my honeymoon to mauristius and it was great.
 
J.D. said:
I've got the 70-200 f/4L non-IS, and its an incredibly sharp lens. If you dont need IS then it can be had secondhand for not a huge amount more than a new 55-250, so I'd definitely recommend it
Click to expand...
I think I know what you mean, relative to the other 70-200 L lenses its less of a difference, but in absolute terms it's still fairly significant:

2nd hand 55-250 IS - from £115
2nd hand 70-200 f4L - from £350



My 2p's worth is this:

Any Canon 70-200mm L is better than the 55-250IS in these terms

  • Speed
  • IQ (Colour, contrast, sharpness)
  • Focus speed and accuracy
  • Build
  • Handling
but

  • They are more expensive
  • They have less range
  • They are bigger and heavier

And more subjectively:

  • The 70-200 L lenses don't balance well on a small body EOS
  • 70mm was too zoomed out as a starting point for me
  • I don't like how obtrusive the big white lenses are (many will find this silly I admit)
 
Well, I got the 70-200mm f4 (non IS) last week. I only have a 500D and it may look a little strange on a smaller body but it still gives the same amazing images.

Ill be getting a grip for my camera to balance things out though.
 
SixToes said:
I think I know what you mean, relative to the other 70-200 L lenses its less of a difference, but in absolute terms it's still fairly significant:

2nd hand 55-250 IS - from £115
2nd hand 70-200 f4L - from £350
Click to expand...

I knew someone would pick up on that! Yes youre right, compared to the price of the 55-250 the 70-200 is over double the cost. But, what I was getting at was that the difference of a couple of hundred is relatively inexepensive for lenses in general and particularly L lenses. If the OP can stretch the budget to a 70-200 then I'd say it's well worth doing so.

Your comparison is spot on btw.
 
The 55-250mm was great on my 10MP 40D, but not really a lens you'd want to put on an 18MP 550d. I've upgraded to the 70-200mm f4 (non IS) and the quality gain more than makes up for the extra cost. My son now uses the 55-250mm on my old 300D.
 
Thankyou very much for all your responses guys!! I'm learning an awful lot from your comments, theyre all much appreciated!

I managed to get out to a nearby shop today and tried out the 55-250 (they didnt have the 70-200L)... the 55-250 did balance well with the lighter 550d body, i see what you mean about using it with a filter lol :P that could get irritating.. and the overall build felt as you'd expect for such a low price.
I took a few pics in the shop/street which im going to look at tonight.

Now im on the hunt for a local place with a 70-200... to get a feel for how it.. 'feels'... lol.. but more so to get an accurate feel as to whether the focal length range would work for me and my 550d's 1.6x...112-320 for the 70-200L.. vs the 55-250's 80-400.

Again ill be using it as a bit of a walk around lens.. im using the nifty fifty and the 18-55 kit at the moment and just want to be so much closer to the action... photographing the fountains in Piccadilly gardens today.. i wanted to get right upto the water droplets landing but 50mm couldnt get me there ^^ and last month snowboarding... i wanted to keep a safe distance back but still get some good close up face shots of my friends coming down the mtain with a nice blurry background

If anyone has advice on suitable focal lengths for what im hoping to do with whatever zoom lens i end up buying.. it would be very much appreciated!

Cheers again,

Pete
 
Thankyou very much for all your responses guys!! I'm learning an awful lot from your comments, theyre all much appreciated!

I managed to get out to a nearby shop today and tried out the 55-250 (they didnt have the 70-200L)... the 55-250 did balance well with the lighter 550d body, i see what you mean about using it with a filter lol :P that could get irritating.. and the overall build felt as you'd expect for such a low price.
I took a few pics in the shop/street which im going to look at tonight.

Now im on the hunt for a local place with a 70-200... to get a feel for how it.. 'feels'... lol.. but more so to get an accurate feel as to whether the focal length range would work for me and my 550d's 1.6x...112-320 for the 70-200L.. vs the 55-250's 80-400.

Again ill be using it as a bit of a walk around lens.. im using the nifty fifty and the 18-55 kit at the moment and just want to be so much closer to the action... photographing the fountains in Piccadilly gardens today.. i wanted to get right upto the water droplets landing but 50mm couldnt get me there ^^ and last month snowboarding... i wanted to keep a safe distance back but still get some good close up face shots of my friends coming down the mtain with a nice blurry background

If anyone has advice on suitable focal lengths for what im hoping to do with whatever zoom lens i end up buying.. it would be very much appreciated!

Cheers again,

Pete
 
Photogo! said:
Again ill be using it as a bit of a walk around lens.. im using the nifty fifty and the 18-55 kit at the moment and just want to be so much closer to the action... photographing the fountains in Piccadilly gardens today.. i wanted to get right upto the water droplets landing but 50mm couldnt get me there ^^ and last month snowboarding... i wanted to keep a safe distance back but still get some good close up face shots of my friends coming down the mtain with a nice blurry background

If anyone has advice on suitable focal lengths for what im hoping to do with whatever zoom lens i end up buying.. it would be very much appreciated!

Cheers again,

Pete
Click to expand...

If youre looking to be able to blur a background the constant f/4 of the 70-200 will help as the 55-250 will have a maximum aperture of f/5.6 by 200mm
 
Brachytron said:
The 55-250mm was great on my 10MP 40D, but not really a lens you'd want to put on an 18MP 550d. I've upgraded to the 70-200mm f4 (non IS) and the quality gain more than makes up for the extra cost. My son now uses the 55-250mm on my old 300D.
Click to expand...

thats a load of rubbish
i used the 55-250 on my 500d and my 550d and would happily use it on the 60d
for a used price of 110-00 you really can not go wrong with it

@250mm 500d
4500386017_b543c9d1e4_z.jpg


@194mm 550d
4713968234_ae7a945b53_z.jpg
 
another suggestion was put forwards today...

any thoughts on the slightly old 80-200 f2.8 L ??? apparently it costs about the same as the 70-200 F4 L, gives nice shots but there may be issues getting it repaired (?due to the age?)


thanks again,

Pete
 
there is also the 70-300 usm is for 349-00 brand new which is not supposed to be too bad a lens
but for just over 100-00 the 55-250 is very hard to beat
 
terryuk said:
thats a load of rubbish
i used the 55-250 on my 500d and my 550d and would happily use it on the 60d
for a used price of 110-00 you really can not go wrong with it

@250mm 500d
4500386017_b543c9d1e4_z.jpg


@194mm 550d
4713968234_ae7a945b53_z.jpg
Click to expand...

I'm glad this lens works for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top