Buy EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II now or wait until September?

[NostraHistoria]

I just bought the regular hood that was recommended. It was less than 2 dollars. lol

 

[Loswr]

Here are the videos. I do not see a difference.

The point wasn't a video with the hood, but OF the hood. Don't bother, just enjoy your cool-looking (but less functional) petal hood.

 

[tntwit]

I think the 55-250 is a worthwhile upgrade over the 75-300 for at least three reasons: IS, sharper and better images, and a newer design. I

To be clear, my 75-300 has IS, but I believe the IS on the 55-250 is better as it is of a newer design.

So the advantage might also be how sharp it is by comparison. They are so cheap, it seems like a good hold over lens compared to living with what I have. I also wonder if the 55 might be a little nicer as the 75 is often too long.

I imagine the slow focus and focus hunting will be no better.

Does anyone know of any comparisons between these two in terms of sharpness? The 75-300 IS isn't on Photozone or the Digital Picture.

Thanks for the replies!

 

[sagittariansrock]

I think the 55-250 is a worthwhile upgrade over the 75-300 for at least three reasons: IS, sharper and better images, and a newer design. I

To be clear, my 75-300 has IS, but I believe the IS on the 55-250 is better as it is of a newer design.

So the advantage might also be how sharp it is by comparison. They are so cheap, it seems like a good hold over lens compared to living with what I have. I also wonder if the 55 might be a little nicer as the 75 is often too long.

I imagine the slow focus and focus hunting will be no better.

Does anyone know of any comparisons between these two in terms of sharpness? The 75-300 IS isn't on Photozone or the Digital Picture.

Thanks for the replies!

I know that your 75-300 has IS but as you correctly guessed the 55-250 has third gen. IS, which is supposed to give a 4-stop advantage. On the other hand 75-300 is the first gen.
As I mentioned, the 55-250 is reasonably sharp (of course it would be silly to compare it to the 70-200 L lenses). It was similar to the 70-300 non-L I owned at the time, which is pretty good up to 200mm.
Finally while the autofocus is slower than ring USM, I guarantee you will find huge improvement over the antique DC motor in the 75-300 IS. And the AF might be slower due to the slower motor but I didn't find any it to be inaccurate or any hunting in normal light. Of course, you wouldn't even use it in low light.
So, that's my 2 cents. I wholeheartedly recommend it to my APS-C user friends who are not looking for L-lenses and don't have the "won't buy EF-S because I will upgrade to FF soon" syndrome.

 

[mrsfotografie]

I know that your 75-300 has IS but as you correctly guessed the 55-250 has third gen. IS, which is supposed to give a 4-stop advantage. On the other hand 75-300 is the first gen.
As I mentioned, the 55-250 is reasonably sharp (of course it would be silly to compare it to the 70-200 L lenses). It was similar to the 70-300 non-L I owned at the time, which is pretty good up to 200mm.
Finally while the autofocus is slower than ring USM, I guarantee you will find huge improvement over the antique DC motor in the 75-300 IS. And the AF might be slower due to the slower motor but I didn't find any it to be inaccurate or any hunting in normal light. Of course, you wouldn't even use it in low light.
So, that's my 2 cents. I wholeheartedly recommend it to my APS-C user friends who are not looking for L-lenses and don't have the "won't buy EF-S because I will upgrade to FF soon" syndrome.

I agree, the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS (I or II) is not a bad lens at all. For a good kit on a tight budget I recommend this lens, and the matching 18-55 IS (I or II) plus possibly the 35 mm f/2 for low-licht stuff. All these lenses are best equipped with a good filter and the original hood to keep stray light and dirty fingers out of the front element and filter

Don't buy the 18-55 IS second hand unless you're sure it's seen little mileage: the ribbon cable for the AF motor will fatigue with every zoom action and break eventually, making it a manual focus lens.

 

[RGF]

WAIT!!! And in Sept WAIT till 1Q14 to see if an upgrade is available then and then wait until Sept 2014 to see if an upgrade is available then.

BTW while you are waiting can I borrow your camera? Atleast I will get some use of out it

Unless their is something critically important, stop the waiting camera and go out and make pictures.

 

[bdunbar79]

It is funny that you guys are fighting over an item that only costs a few dollars. I think I will buy the regular one too and see if there is a difference.

Here are the videos. I do not see a difference.

Canon T3i with 18-55mm
Canon T3i with 15-55mm and Petal Hood

I'm only going to type this one more time and sorry if I'm in an irritated mood today, but:

IT'S THE WRONG HOOD!

 

[wickidwombat]

I just ordered a new one from eBay for $169.99. Now, I need a petal hood. Which is the best? I have a T3i with a 18-55mm.

.

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/EW-60C-ET-60-Lens-Hood-Set-for-CANON-EF-18-55mm-55-250mm-/170835360158?pt=AU_Cameras_Photographic_Accessories&hash=item27c694b99e

here ya go a hood for the 18-55 and one for the 55-250 i wouldnt waste the money on genuine ones

 

[NostraHistoria]

The regular hood came in today. I cannot take a pic right now but I will. My filter came in too.

Hoya 58mm HD Circular PL CIR-PL Filter High Definition C-PL CPL 58 mm

 

[NostraHistoria]

I might as well say that the 55-250mm came in and it is for people looking for birds and stuff like that. From 55mm, you get a bad picture with the sides cut off. I am disappointed. I should have got the 18-135mm.

 

[NostraHistoria]

Now, I see that the petal hood is bigger. Bigger is better? Not for cameras? The difference between the two is small. Unless you have your own opinion, which I want to hear. Convince me the regular one is better when the petal one is bigger and at the shortest sides is a few millimeters bigger.

 

[wickidwombat]

i thought this might be a joke thread but it looks like you are really serious.... :-\ ???

 

[mrsfotografie]

i thought this might be a joke thread but it looks like you are really serious.... :-\ ???

+1 :'(

 

[rs]

Now, I see that the petal hood is bigger. Bigger is better? Not for cameras? The difference between the two is small. Unless you have your own opinion, which I want to hear. Convince me the regular one is better when the petal one is bigger and at the shortest sides is a few millimeters bigger.

Even if you don't want to take a video of it, for your own understanding, please just fit the petal hood, make sure the lens is set to autofocus, and then half press the shutter to let the lens AF on different subjects. Try it without looking through the viewfinder, but looking at the camera - just as the people you're trying to impress will see it. If you find the rotation of the petal lens hood impressive, I'm pleased for you.

Please note that the videos you posted were not only through the lens, but there was no focusing there - just zooming.

And as for the depth of the hood, it should be as deep as possible without introducing vignetting. Canon are pretty clued up when it comes to optics - I'd guess they're a bit better at it than you and people that make cheap rubbish to sell on eBay, so personally I'd go with the Canon design.