File :-(, x, )
Canon EF-S 55-250 IS review Anonymous
Sup /p/, here is my quick review of the new 55-250 IS.

The image quality is excellent. I don't have any of the 70-200 Ls but I've used them and I can't tell the difference from a blind test. People say L naturally have more contrast and give more "pop" but I don't really see it that way.

The AF isn't perfect and is slow if you're used to USM. You won't be using it for sports or action but it's not really made for that anyway.

IS works perfect and build quality is okay.

It's cheap, small and light. If you don't already own telephoto lenses, you should definitely consider it. It's half the price of the 70-300 IS and the performance is just as good. But I'll admit I've never used that one.

Pictures to follow.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
Thanks for that review anon!!!

These shots are very vibrant and clear.. I really wanted to get a tele lens.. and I hated how flimsy the 70-300mm felt, the IS was also sub par compared to the 70-200mm L f/4

How is the IS on this?
same as the 70-300mm, or better?
>> Anonymous
>>127386

I've never used the 70-300 IS but I'm sure the build quality of the 55-250 isn't as good. It's exactly like the 18-55 except it's longer.

>> and I hated how flimsy the 70-300mm felt, the IS was also sub par compared to the 70-200mm L f/4

Dude, the 70-200 f/4.0 L IS was introduced last year. The 70-300 IS has been here since 1995 and it was the first IS lens from Canon.
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
>>127424
haha man i never knew that lens was so old

but, the IS on this one... is it very similar to the 18-55mm IS?
because that aint too shabby
>> Anonymous
I don't have the 18-55 IS but I'm sure it's the same thing.
>> Anonymous
>>127424
That was the 75-300 IS. New(er) version is the 70-300 IS, and it's a damn nice lens.