55-250 IS on crop sensor vs 100-400 (mk I) on full frame

m8547 said:
StudentOfLight said:
Thanks for putting the 55-250 on my radar. Since I moved to full frame all my lenses have been EF with the only exception being the lovable 24mm STM.

I'm confused by this. The 55-250 (STM, IS, or whatever) is an EF-S lens, so it won't fit on full frame. I've been using it on my T3i. I upgraded to full frame, but I wanted something with the same reach and image quality that I had with the old lens and body combo. It turns out that's harder to get than I anticipated. The 70-200 f/4 IS is probably the closest full frame lens, but then you would miss the extra reach of the crop sensor.
It was implied that I still have an APS-C body (60D) which I use my EF-S 24mm STM on. I didn't see much value in selling it for peanuts, it's more valuable to me in my hands. Of course I can use my 70-200/2.8 on the 60D. I have and the results are great, but 55-250 is a wider range as you mentioned.

I also have friends/family and random strangers ask for equipment recommendations, so it's useful to know that the 55-250 offers good value for money and is available on a more affordable platform.
 
Upvote 0
AlanF said:
The 100-400 is of variable quality. The good ones are fine but there are too many bad copies. It's a lens you should never buy without testing it first. The Mk II, on the other hand, is of high uniform quality
Has anyone done any testing to back up that claim for the mark II having high uniform quality ? I also thought the consensus of opinion was that the variability issue with the 100-400 had been fixed back around 2008.
 
Upvote 0
I think my 100-400 was from around or after 2008. It was not that old. But I can't remember exactly.

I don't think I've heard anyone complain about the 100-400 II, and Lensrentals took one apart and determined it's extremely well built. Lens Rentals is the only one that could test it because no one else has enough of them to play with.
 
Upvote 0