EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II VS Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS ?

[leo76uk]

Hi,

I purchased Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS II, the newer version (MKII) online, the retailer has sent me the older version of the canon lens (EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS). I would like to know is there any difference in these lenses. Is it worth keeping or do I need to contact my online retailer?

The reason I am asking this question is it’s saves my time as they need to arrange for collection and then process for another delivery and I work full-time, where I need to arrange some for collection and delivery, it’s a big headache. Please some answer my question I really appreciate your advice.

Many Thanks.
Leo

 

[ferdi]

The MTF chart of the II looks better, check
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_s_55_250mm_f_4_5_6_is_ii#Overview
vs
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/eos_slr_camera_systems/lenses/ef_s_55_250mm_f_4_5_6_is#Overview
Some people say the IS has improved a little too.
I would return the lens myself. At least settle the price difference, if any (the II is actually slightly cheaper in Holland).

 

[Loswr]

I would like to know is there any difference in these lenses.

There is no optical difference between the two lenses - the changes are entirely cosmetic in nature. Specifically, the ring on which the focal lengths are printed is now black instead of silver, the font used for the lens name is different, some text has been placed in different positions on the lens ("Image Stabilizer" was moved), and the registration mark (the white square used to align the lens to the mount) is now just painted on vs. being moulded and painted. These were the same cosmetic changes made to the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS when it was 'updated' to the MkII verison.

The MTF chart of the II looks better

Some people say the IS has improved a little too.

Some people say the moon is made of green cheese, too. The optics are identical in both versions. At least, Canon made no official statement to the contrary, and the size, weight, number of elements and groups, and most importantly, the MTF curves, are identical. Ok, the MTF curves are not exactly identical, because of an error on Canon's website (honest mistake, or trying to make the lenses look different?) - the 55mm MTF on one is identical to the 250mm MTF on the other, and vice versa. The fact that you see no IQ difference between the two versions is certainly consistent with the fact that they have identical optical construction and MTF curves...

Regarding the supposed 'better IS', when they released the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II, Canon explicitly stated, "The version II of this lens includes new IS algorithms to distinguish between normal photographing and when the camera is panning to automatically provide the optimal level of image-shake correction." Canon made no such statement about the EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS II. Since the certainly aren't shy about publicizing improvements, the inference is that there is nothing cahnged for the IS algorightms of the 55-250mm MkII.

From a consumer standpoint, there is no difference at all in the 55-250mm MkI vs. MkII, and only a very minor electronic difference specific to the panning mode IS for the 18-55mm MkI vs. MkII. But from a corporate perspective, the changes to these lenses result in a small savings on the unit production costs for these two lenses. Given that Canon makes more of these two lenses than any others (and those two plus the 50mm f/1.8 II almost certainly account for more units sold than than all other Canon lenses combined!), even a small reduction in the unit production cost translates to a significant increase in profit.

 

[bigblue1ca]

Given that Canon makes more off these two lenses [55-250mm & 18-55mm] than any others (and those two plus the 50mm f/1.8 II almost certainly account for more units sold than than all other Canon lenses combined!)...

That's very interesting. Really goes to show how large the entry level consumer market is.

 

[ferdi]

The MTF chart of the II looks better

Some people say the IS has improved a little too.

Some people say the moon is made of green cheese, too. The optics are identical in both versions. At least, Canon made no official statement to the contrary, and the size, weight, number of elements and groups, and most importantly, the MTF curves, are identical. Ok, the MTF curves are not exactly identical, because of an error on Canon's website (honest mistake, or trying to make the lenses look different?) - the 55mm MTF on one is identical to the 250mm MTF on the other, and vice versa.

I didn't even notice that because they are slightly different in size.
So it's all a matter of cosmetic preference. Maybe the resale version of the II is better?