Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Telephoto Zoom AF Lens

A place for Jay to post many pictures of empty warehouses as well as other to post pictures and discuss the geekier aspects of photography.

Moderator: ben306

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Telephoto Zoom AF Lens

Postby Marcus » Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:27 pm

Debating buying this to give me a bit more of a lens range in my bag:-

[ame="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-55-250mm-Telephoto-Selected-Digital/dp/B000V9D5LG/ref=dp_cp_ob_ce_title_0"]Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Telephoto Zoom AF Lens: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics[/ame]

Opinions?
Marcus
 
Posts: 3760
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:00 am
Reputation point: 0

Postby Mad-Dan » Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:10 pm

cant really help with that lens, but i've a 55 - 300 F3.5 - 4.6 which i've used about 8 times, 200 - 500mm f4 which i've used once, i just cant find a use for anything over 80mm
.
User avatar
Mad-Dan
 
Posts: 10419
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:00 am
Location: homeless
Reputation point: 0

Postby Hugh Jeers » Wed Nov 17, 2010 1:31 am

Long range perving or wildlife stalking?
Hugh Jeers
 
Posts: 14067
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 1:00 am
Reputation point: -5

Postby El Negro von Coon » Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:04 am

Hmmm. All I can say is this - I have the 15-200mm and it's pretty shite. Wouldn't bother to be honest.

The thing to remember with lenses is that they are the ultimate example of 'You get what you pay for'. If a lens is cheap and looks like a bargain, it's probably going to be shit. The most expensive lens I have (unfortunately) is my 18-22 wide angle, which set me back £670. Image quality wise it shits all over my 18-200 which I paid about £400 for (can't remember now), but then Jaffa's 70-200mm which he paid £1200 for absolutely fucking shits all over my wide angle, etc etc.

tl;dr - don't buy it, I'd wager it's a wank lens.
User avatar
El Negro von Coon
Junior Member
 
Posts: 1775
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 11:37 pm
Location: Warrington
Reputation point: 0

Postby Mad-Dan » Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:50 am

El Negro von Coon wrote: but then Jaffa's 70-200mm which he paid £1200 for absolutely fucking shits all over my wide angle, etc etc.


if its a sony lens, it will, for all their falts, genuine sony glass is awesome.
.
User avatar
Mad-Dan
 
Posts: 10419
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:00 am
Location: homeless
Reputation point: 0

Postby Jaffa » Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:18 am

Mad-Dan wrote:if its a sony lens, it will, for all their falts, genuine sony glass is awesome.


It's exactly the same as the old Minolta 70-200mm f/2.8. Even the Canon and Nikon equivalents are AWESOME. You do get what you pay for. I had a 70-200 f/4.5-f/5.6 Sony lens and it was fucking terrible.
User avatar
Jaffa
 
Posts: 9210
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:00 am
Location: Manchester
Reputation point: 10


Return to Photography Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron