Canon 55-250 STM.. the best value lens on the market?

Jules

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2000
Messages
5,887
Reaction score
1,379
Points
1,539
Its so good that with a 2x digital zoom at 250mm, its still sharper than my Tamron 150-600 at 500mm.

Hell, if you ignore its low light inadequacies..... it really isn't significantly worse than my amazing my 70-200 F2.8 IS II (nearly £2000) at any focal length.

Its image stabilisation works really well, its STM focus motor excels with video on the 80D, its silent, and easy to carry round.

Indoors or in low light things are different, but who needs 250mm indoors.

What an amazing lens for the money... is it the best value on the market? I think it must be.
 
...have you had the Tamron checked ?
 
As Jim says, have you had the Tamron checked and also made sure there's no front/back focus? I never take these as gospel, but looking at this the Tamron at 500mm is sharper than the 55-250mm at 250mm let alone degrading it further digital zoom.

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Lens Image Quality

Although it could be that the Tamron and 70-200mm just don't like crop bodies as the scores with the 7D-II for example are really poor.
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM on Canon EOS 7D Mark II vs Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2 (Model A022) Canon on Canon EOS 7D Mark II vs Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM on Canon EOS 7D Mark II | DxOMark

Compare them with FF (unfortunately you can't put the 55-250 on FF in this test) and the difference is more apparent, even discounting the fact that FF will always be sharper.
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM on Canon EOS 7D Mark II vs Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2 (Model A022) Canon on Canon EOS 5D Mark IV vs Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM on Canon EOS 5D Mark IV | DxOMark

But yes, for the price it's very good value :smashin:
 
The 18-135 is also an excellent lens, being one of the quickest to focus and with very good low light performance. I also have the 55-250, but preferred my older Tamron 70-300. Just a shame it stopped working!
 
i have the 18-135 too, but is not as sharp as the 55-250, and its much more expensive. it also covers focal lengths better covered by other lenses.

Theres just no real alternative to the 55-250 IMO.
 
i have the 18-135 too, but is not as sharp as the 55-250, and its much more expensive. it also covers focal lengths better covered by other lenses.

Theres just no real alternative to the 55-250 IMO.
I guess the closest would be the 70-300mm's
 
could just be the shorter FL is easier to handle/shoot-with - the 600mm end will need much better technique and better light/faster shutter speed that the 55-250mm....
 
could just be the shorter FL is easier to handle/shoot-with - the 600mm end will need much better technique and better light/faster shutter speed that the 55-250mm....
Good point, the 150-600's are monsters to handle in comparison.
 
Interesting thread :) Recently I've purchased the Reikan FoCal software to test my lenses and calibrate autofocus micro adjust on the camera bodies that provide that feature. I don't have the 55-250 but it has been interesting to see the relative sharpness of the lenses measured. My 18-135 for example has a max quality of "1900" which the software tells me is typical. This is close to a number of my L lenses which are all in the ball park relative to the typical scores for their model. The 70-200 has one of the highest scores at "2100". Would be test out the 55-250 under the same conditions, has anyone done that?
 
It's shocking how low most lenses rate on the 7D2 according to DXO Mark. For a top lens like the Canon 70-200 to only score 7 P-MP sharpness out of a 20.2 MP sensor is shocking. It just goes to show that putting a FF lens on a crop body mostly means a drastically reduced perceptual IQ. People always say that you should put your money into top quality glass rather than upgrade bodies... it seems that that's rarely the case for crop bodies in particular. In many, if not most cases, pairing a cheaper Canon EF-S lens designed for a crop sensor body will outperform a top EF (FF) lens put on that same crop body. What's the point in buying a £1700 70-200mm lens for your 7d, when a £150 55-250stm will resolve the same 7 P-MP sharpness?.

I recently had a portrait shoot and checking my Canon 7d (mk1) compatibility with my 70-200mm lens, DXO Mark was telling me that I was getting 7 P-MP! ... that's out of an 18mp sensor! I borrowed my friends Canon 6d and put on my 70-200mm lens for the shoot and got double that at 14 P-MP. For something as critical as a close up headshot, that's a big deal for me, as a pixel peeper.

It's really become apparent to me that I need to carefully match my body and lens combinations in future to get the most out of my sensor. For example, the sharpest P-MP lens (except for the crazy expensive Zeiss) is the Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art. Out of a 20mp Canon 6d sensor, it produces an amazing 19 P-MP! On a Canon 5d mk3, it is giving you 21 P-MP out of a 22mp sensor. So, nearly maximising the resolving/sharpness of the sensors capability.

Similarly on a Nikon D750 FF camera with its 24mp sensor, the Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art is resolving ALL 24P-MP sharpness! ...

For a pixel peeper like me, that's what I want.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom