Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM

[neuroanatomist]

Re: EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM

My EF-M 55-200mm arrived yesterday morning, I took it out for a test drive later in the day...

"Down the Hatch"

EOS M2, EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM @ 200mm, 1/1600 s, f/6.3, ISO 800

A question, will this (on M) fit in the Dashpoint-30 case? If not, do you any comparable bag?

Nope. It's maybe 1/2" too short.

The M2 + M55-200 combo does fit in my Dashpoint 30. It's a tight fit, but not a problem at all to get the lid zipped shut.

 

[Haydn1971]

Used my new EF-M 55-200 extensively last weekend, not uploaded to the computed yet, but pleased with the results in the camera - looking forward to giving it a good workout in Scotland at the end of the month

 

[Tyroop]

I have a trip to Hoi An planned next month and I just picked up one of these lenses. I am planning to take an EOS M6 with the EF-M 22mm, EF-M 11-22mm, and EF-M 18-55mm. I am happy with the image quality of all three lenses. I also wanted a longer focal length lens and - to stay with an all-M system - this one seemed the natural choice.

I've been doing a little testing today, although not in perfect conditions, and now I'm not sure. The images are OK, but I have been spoiled in the past with the EF 70-200mm f/4L and the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS. If I rated these lenses at 100, I would only rate the EF-M 55-200 at about 70, but it is a much cheaper lens and the build quality and optics simply aren't the same. They can't be compared.

I can see a use for the 55-200mm, but I'm not sure when or if I will get a chance to go back to Hoi An and for my trip I want the best possible images. It is also slow, with a maximum f/6.3 aperture at the long end.

For the longer focal length that I want I am now considering taking either the EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS or the EF 85mm f/1.8 with the EOS M to EF adapter. The former will give me more flexibility with focal length, but the latter will be better in low light.

Ideally, I only want to take three lenses (preferably small ones) - four at most, but no more than that. If I was going alone it would be different, but with two young kids in tow I can't carry loads of gear.

I still have a few weeks to do more testing and make a decision. It's a matter of compromising between size/weight and image quality. Recently, I also acquired an EF-M 15-45mm and that was a bit of a disappointment. The image quality of the early EF-M lenses was very good (metal lens mounts too), but the later lenses with plastic mounts just don't seem as good. I hope this is a problem that Canon are working on.

http://phil.uk.net/photography/canon-ef-m-55-200mm-f4p5-f6p3-is-stm.html

 

[andrei1989]

since you already have an adapter, have you considered the EF-S 55-250 STM? i have this on the M5 and it's really good, or at least i like it a lot
it's much lighter than the 70-200 and can be found very very cheap

 

[AlanF]

since you already have an adapter, have you considered the EF-S 55-250 STM? i have this on the M5 and it's really good, or at least i like it a lot
it's much lighter than the 70-200 and can be found very very cheap

+1. My EF-S 55-250 STM has better IQ than my 70-200mm L IS on the M5.

 

[Tyroop]

Thanks for your feedback. I had no idea that the EF-S 55-250 STM was that good, but these are glowing tributes. To be honest, I wasn't looking at getting any more lenses, but was trying to decide which lenses to take that I already have.

However, I'll take a look at the sites I use to buy gear and will see how much it costs.

 

[Tyroop]

This is the on-line store where I bought my EOS M6. The EF-S 55-250mm is currently out of stock but, as you say, it is very cheap. Better than the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS? That really surprises me.

https://www.digital2home.com/shop/canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f4-5-6-ii-2/

 

[AlanF]

. Better than the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS? That really surprises me.

There is sample variation on all lenses, and so relative merits will vary according to the copies tested. Go to the photozone site and compare the MTFs of both lenses. They are pretty close on their copies, with the 70-200mm L IS being slightly ahead for theirs at comparable focal lengths. But, at the maximum focal lengths, their 70-200mm at 200mm and f/4 resolves 2392 lw/ph at the centre and 2280 at the edges whereas the 55-250 at 250mm resolves 2252 and 2055 respectively - only 6% less at the centre and 10% at the edge. But the 25% extra focal length gives effectively more resolution. Even stopping down to f/5.6 for the 70-200mm, still has it behind the 55-250 at 250mm for effective resolution.