@@forrealtho06 I get the point about focal length, but people are saying the same about the aperture of the big 100-500 and the 800 f11. And both are absolutely excellent lenses in a multitude of ways. I’d never want to trade a kg or so of weight for a bit more light at the long end. The difference really isn’t as big as you may think. I feel like the people who always hate in the comment section never touched one of those RF pieces and just read off a spec sheet.
@@janholubicka7154 Oh, my mistake, I thought the comment was about Canon reintroducing a new 17-55 f/2.8 for RF. I'm not gonna pick it up, my 6D and nifty fifty is suiting me very well.
The original 'IS version II' is complete dog shit. I have one that can't really sell because nobody wants the damn thing. It's noisy, soft, it rotates, rattles and it feels like it's going to break on its own weight... didn't like it, at all.
I suspect that this lens, like many, has a fair bit of variability in the manufacture. My copy is probably somewhat of a golden sample. It's one of my sharpest lenses, outperforming a few lenses that, according to various tests, should be sharper. Or maybe the copy tested here is a poor one.
Agreed, mine has always produced really sharp images, but i haven't done a test like these with an R7, so i can't really tell if it's better or not, on my M50 it looks great.
This is a great intermediate quality lens. It came as a 2nd kit lens on some of the Canon crop cameras so there are a ton of them out there on the used market, often for less than usd 100. I'm keeping mine for a backup and a wildlife lens when I need a little more reach than my 135mm.
I still using that 700d and 55-250 lens,and the lens it's can do for portrait,macro, sports and street photography pretty much everything (daylight), results not amazing,not super sharp but it's still really good, it's also cheap...and beast for blur background
I have been very impressed with this lens on my M6 mark II, with its 32 MP sensor very similar to that in the R7. I don't think it's soft in the centre, and I really like it for larger wildlife, like polar bears. I recently bought the R7 with RF glass, but you're persuading to spring for the EF-RF adaptor to keep using this lens.
I am the owner of this lens, and in general I would not say that the center of the image is so soft wide open. On the contrary, it is quite sharp. Some kind of defect lens you have, honestly
@@matveym3900 “no” isn’t an intelligible answer to my question of “What body are you using it on?” Your 77D is only 24 megapixels, the R7 is 32 megapixels, which would explain why this lens would appear sharper on your camera
I had the older version of this lens, the IS II for my EOS 90D, which has the same 32 MP sensor. Especially zoomed in, the softness was easily noticeable even by someone like me. That's when I gave in to my inner evil, and got the 70-300mm L lens. It's my first L lens, and boy oh boy is it fantastic!
Old lens: 5:28 vs. New Lens: ruclips.net/video/C569xzh5N4k/видео.html Scary how Canon manages to continually improve their budget lenses. 10 years ago the EF-S 55-250 IS STM was one of the best kit lenses ever made, I think an argument could be made it would still outperform the new RF-S 55-210 IS STM at the longest focal length given the extra 40mm of telephoto reach, but the new RF-S 55-210 certainly appears to be much more useful across its zoom range.
Isn't the newer rf 55-210mm darker? I am thinking to adapt this ef lens over the newer one. Should I do that? Portability isn't an issue for me, what do you think? RF or the older efs adapted...
@@anuragjha8962 The new lens is darker but anyone using the EF 55-250 will be stopping down to f8 as often as possible anyway. The crazy thing about the EF 55-250 is that 5-6 years ago you could find it for $150 on black friday, at that price it was a must have for all EF shooters. When both are the same price it's pretty safe to say the new RF 55-210 is the better buy.
@@anuragjha8962 Based on this test you would need to stop down to f8 anyway so unless you´re on a tight budget, i wouldnt bother adapting this ef-s lens.
I have this lens adapted onto my 24 megapixel m50, and I've never had any problems with a lack of sharpness. I've taken many good pictures with it. Maybe it's the jump to 32 megapixels that's the problem
I would love to see you retest the Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD which you tested quite long ago and gave a very positive review, I have been using the lens for the last 2 years and it has been amazing, but I don't really have a great point of comparison since that's the only long telephoto lens I've used. I would also love to you test it again with a more modern canon R camera since I still use a DSLR and would like to see how it would fair on a mirrorless camera if I ever chose to upgrade in the future (I'm not really planning that though).
Dude I'm so glad you managed to find a new way to review all the lenses in the world again. I really loved it and I promise I'll see everything you post again.
Current used price for this in the US is well under $100! A bargain with the understanding that a slow lens shines in daytime sunny locations. I'm in the market for a used 70-300 nano which will have a little more reach and build quality but may not improve image quality.
Thanks for the review. These are very informative for us trying to decide whether to move from an SLR with EF-S lenses (like the 90D). It'd be super helpful if you decided to try some third party lenses as well, like the Tamron 18-400 or Sigma 18-300. Cheers?
Amazing review as usual chris ❤ which one is better lens this efs 55-250 or the new RFs 55 210 ? As prescribed the old one have wide aperture and more reach
This lens also works incredibly well on the 90D. I was having soft issues with my more expensive lenses until I realised that 90D only really works with post 2009 lenses and this one was released in 2013 so is brilliant. I bought it for £150 back in 2016 and now it sells on Amazon for £309 because it's just such a great lens. I would recommend using this with a flash for indoor wedding photography to be able to use the f8 aperture.
Lots of people rave about the sharpness of the 55-250 STM, but I think it's a dog on my M50. Not sure if I have a bad copy, but like you said, you have to go to f8 to get anything sharp out of it at longer lengths (which is where it primarily will be used), which makes it almost unusable in anything other than good day light. It's so bad I might end up taking the 70-300 mk1 away travelling with me. The whole reason I bought the 55-250 was for its small size and weight! EDIT : other people are saying that they are getting good results - I imagine this cheaper lens probably suffers massively from sample variation...
I really miss this lens from my Canon DSLR days. It performed amazingly and gave me all of my best shots. A little sad to say but ive yet to find a fuji lens that offered the same level of price performance that this one did. Fuji lenses are EXPENSIVE 😭
I put a efs 18-135mm f3.5 /5.6 stm to my eos m6 mark ii that has 32,5 megapixels sensor.. and it cant handle the big megapixels sensor hahaha except for video.. its quite sharp
I’m surprised how soft this was!! It always performed well when I adapted it to my M6 Mark II, so I wonder if this was a soft copy? Oh well. I sold it long again and have no intention of buying one again.
It might unfortunately be a long while before I get to explore the R series...but until then, my 55-250 STM unit is still giving me great results on my EOS M6 :)
0:57 It works on Canon 5D Mark III and Mark 4 with replaced lens bayonet and if to combine this lens with Kenko TELEPLUS HD DGX 1.4x Teleconverter, there will be no vignetting. With Canon 5D Mark III you may autofocus through Live View and with Canon 5D Mark IV it's fully compatible with all available auto focus points. And it produce pretty sharp images. If you wonder I left my review as a proof: "Canon 55-250 (STM) vs Canon 100-400 (II), Kenko x1.4 Teleconverter for FF camera. Real life samples." ruclips.net/video/knHz7cZVBtU/видео.html
On my 77d, I always liked this lens...bought after your original view. I always found it sharper than a lens of this price/size should be! I miss it's light and compact size.
I adapted this lens onto my Canon R6 Mark II and it’s amazing. Being a crop sensor lens, the R62 automatically crops the full frame sensor. The STM motor works great with mirrorless autofocus.
Very curious how the features and handling compare to the other tele options for RF mount. Was hoping you would do a comparison. Absolute resolution isn’t everything, for me at least. On that note you say you are disappointed by the results but what other lens has sharper images for the same size and price?
Just got this lens new for £100 in 2024 for my EF-M system. Works great with the Viltrox adaptor. I considered the EF-M native Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM but decided to buy this EF-S version instead for the extra zoom and much better price and it works nicely on M50 and M6 II. I liked your initial review of this lens and checking now the nice revisit :)
Like a few others here, I do use this lens with my M6II. Before this I was using a 24mp 200D and the images I got on that cam with this lens was so sharp wide open both at 55mm and 250mm. I do agree maybe the 32.5mp of my M6II (and the R7) pushes this lens a bit too far coz I did notice my images becoming a bit softer, but I'm also inclined to agree that there's definitely sample variations coz my images are not as soft as the ones here. Still, a great re-review Chris! I'll continue using this till I save up enough for a 70-300 or 100-400 L lens :)
This was a great rereview. I have still have a Canon 70D and my EF-S 55-250mm. Any opinion on which would be a better upgrade? Getting the Canon R7 or upgrading the lens to a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8? Used they're the same price right now.
3 месяца назад
Hi, which do you recommend between Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM or EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM? I don't have money for an L version :(
I just got my R7 and had to test this lens on a tripod, sure enough at 250mm f8 is a step up in contrast and sharpness. Not having the exact same test chart I can't say if my copy is the same or better than Christopher has, but it's similar enough I'd vouch for his results. Problem is the perception of image sharpness is different for everyone, if you're Ken Rockwell then this lens is sharper than a whole bag of razor blades and 10 years ago this level of image quality was revolutionary for a kit lens, you are genuinely going to get better images using this over an old EF 70-200 f2.8 zoom that costs $2,000 and weighs four times more. Pretty sure the RF 70-200 f2.8 is in another class though. Regardless, it's not that the lens is "sharp and f8 and blurry at f5.6" it's "sharp at f5.6 and tack sharp at f8".
@@budthecyborg4575 I mean for the money you pay for this lens and the performance you get out of it is definitely worth praising. Also, this lens was also a HUGE upgrade to its predecessor, I tried both and the stm version was just so much better. I always recommend this version of 55-250 from canon to people who are asking me whats the best budget telephoto zoom lens they could buy for their crop sensor cameras.
So glad I chose the much smaller, slightly shorter, slightly darker 55-210 RF. It's way better, based on your review. And this STM is quite expensive used.
I don't know, sharpness seems fairly average to me. But I really don't like the rendering, lackluster stabilisation and the lack of luminosity, and that's much more important to me.. in comparison, the EF-S 10-18 is superb
The lens i use for my motorsports photography! Good lens, though I've seen its weakness in situations where i have to use max zoom. Aside from the obvious auto aperture adjustment that makes things underexposed, it's not as sharp as compared to using its mid focal lengths.. it also vignettes.
Thanks for the re-review! I have this lens on my R7 and was wondering how it compared to the new Canon RF-S 55-210mm f/5-7.1 IS STM. I watched both of your reviews back-to-back and decided the new lens is not improved enough to replace my EF-S 55-250mm IS STM lens. Slightly better image quality but a reduced zoom range and a smaller maximum aperture doesn't make jump up and proclaim "I must have it." I'll save me tuppence for a more compelling lens. 🤠
@@Louis-zk4bq I bought my Canon R7 with a RF-S IS 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 lens and found myself using the EF-S 55-250 lens less and less. I stopped putting the 55-250mm lens in my camera bag because when attached to the EF-RF adapter is was just too long to carry around all day. Last month I sold the EF-S 55-250mm and my EF-S 17-55mm and my EF-S 24MM lenses. I bought a Pentax MZ-3 film camera with the money. I have a dozen old Pentax lenses and I take a few rolls of film a year. I did not get rid of my Canon R-7. So my biased advice to you Louis is if you have any Canon "R" mirrorless lens is to consider the extra size of an EF lens with a EF-RF adapter when shopping for a lens. 📸🙂
@@Nedski42YT So, to start in telephotography you advise me to go for the EF-S 55-250 for the price (its kind of a bargain)? The RF-S 55-210 just seems worse in every aspect (price,range, light,...) other than sharpness. Or i could pick up (for a lot more money though) an EF 70-200 f/4L IS...
@@Louis-zk4bq Yup, the EF-S 55-250 seems objectively better but it is physically larger than the RF-S 55-210. You could always sell/trade the EF lens if/when you tire of it. Oooo... I'd go for the RF70-200mm F4 L IS USM but I would have to sell my car!
Great lens for its price, size and funtional zoom range. No need to use this at f4 anyway when it works its best and sharpest at f5.6. STM and IS functions also a great plus for video work. Still a great lens for the price 10years on.
Just as a speed booster narrows the picture from full frame to APS-C, a 1.4 converter widens the EF-S picture to full frame size. And also: the 1.4 converter does not stick out to damage the mirror. Only: Canon's and Sigma's converters stick out on the front, so that you still have to remove, widen or replace the plastic disk, but Kenko's converter does not stick out on either side. And the modern Canon R cameras regognize the Canon and Sigma (but not my Tamron!) EF-S lenses as APS-C and force a 1.6 crop. No way getting around it, as far as I know.
I took this lens to Africa in 2019. On my M6mkii, I took hundreds of pictures through our moving minibus windows and most were keepers. For the money and the weight, you won't find a better lens for a Canon APSC camera. I hope that the new RF-S 55-210mm f/5-7.1 IS STM is not considered to be a replacement for this lens.
I am a wedding photographer (in the hall and people) and I shoot videos for RUclipsrs as well. I intend to open a channel, God willing. I have a Canon 850d, 50mm 1.8 and 24mm 2.8 lenses, and a kit lens 18-55. Would you advise me to update the camera to the 6dmii, or would you advise me to invest in better lenses? Is the 850 possible to get a professional job with me, or does it not mean that I can be a professional photographer with it? And if you advised me to invest in lenses, would you advise me, which lens should I buy? And if you advise me to get a new camera, which is the best option, knowing that I am a student and the budget is not the best thing? I will do associations and so on?😅 And thank you very much for the beautiful videos. I benefited a lot from you ♥️
The 55-250 lens of the latest STM version is the crown of technology, a very serious lens with a light weight. Competitors and canon itself have no modern analogues of this quality. It resolves 24 megapixels of the matrix, it does this even at maximum zoom. Photos from him can be cropped in a 1000 mm crop and posted on social networks, they will be very sharp. (the main thing to understand is that at a distance of more than one kilometer, the air itself will spoil the picture - this is physics! ) Moreover, it has a 1.4 converter from kenko hd, so the optics are so seriously resolved that the installation of this teleconvector does not spoil the final picture, a good convector + optics resolves with a margin. I also like that he starts twisting the side at 250 mm, like a Russian Gelius.
You know its strange.. how many different reviews there are that do not agree. Little things "very sharp" vs " not that sharp you will notice". Be nice if every lens was made exactly the same yet they are not. Then the cameras.. that plays a huge part then the person blah blah blah. But I just got it new for $145. Very sharp.. for me
i had this lens and the m50 mki for a few days and the images were amazing, surprisingly amazing and the contrast was amazing with the m50, even now i look compared to my L lenses and it's still look good
These RE-reviews of EF lenses on newer Canon R cameras is interesting as well helpful !! Would love to see a review of the Canon EF 300 2.8 IS mk 1 on a R7 or R5 . Keep up the good work/s 👍🏻🙂
I'm pretty disappointed with the image quality of this lens. Tried doing some light wildlife photography with it the other day and a lot of the pictures were soft or out of focus. Even at f8 it's not that sharp and the AF isn't the best either
I must have a great copy because it's ridiculously sharp on my m6ii. I have two minor gripes. It occasionally hunts, or even fails to find focus for no apparent reason and vignetting at 5.6.
Love your reviews Christopher. It is marvellous that they always focus on the equipment, not on you! This last review confused me a bit though, you pretty much raved about this lens in 2014 on a 20Mp camera, but now are saying that based on your 32Mp tests that it would likely be pretty mediocre on 20Mp...? I always wonder too about target image testing such as that which you now do. Does such testing not constrain the distance to target and thus perhaps indicate somewhat different performance from real world tests at different focal distances. Were your older reviews of the brick building done in real outdoor conditions or were they also of a target - also, if they were outdoors, was focus distance different from those done with your current test target? Overall though, really do enjoy and trust your reviews. Thank you for the great work!
Before upgrading to Canon RP, I had Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 and Sigma 17-50mm F2.8. I would like to see Christ do re-review on the R7. Now, I am still keeping the Tokina 11-16mm as I still don't have the budget for the RF 16mm lens.
This is great! I'm looking at getting the R7 body (no longer considering the RP) and coming from the old DSLR Rebel T5i with the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens AND the EF-S 55-250mm featured here, it's great to see your Re-review for the 55-250. It was an impulse buy 10 years ago when I purchased it and it's great to see it's still somewhat useful when stopping down. I would love to see a Re-review on the 18-55mm as I'm considering on keeping those lenses, along with the 50mm EF f1.8 I purchased years later. Keep up the great work with the Re-reviews!
I had almost bought this lens for my M50. The Canon guy had told me that the 70-300mm was sharper and I got that one and I am still pleased with the purchase.
Fantastic walkaround lens with the R7 with a raynox R 150 or R 250 for real macro/small mamals/nearby birds and landscapes/plants. I haven´s yet found a lens this versatile with a low weight and with the same sharpnes to fit my R7 (and my raynox lenses). It´s my No 1 choise when i want to walk around lightweight and be able to shot always anything (but wide angle shots).
Hello Christopher. Thank you very much for your excellent videos! I'm excited about the different camera-lens combinations you've already tested. I shoot with a Canon R5 and am thinking about getting a Canon EF 28-300 L. Have you had any experience with this combination or could you even make a video about it? In any case, I would be very happy about it. Thanks a lot - keep up the good work!
which of these two lenses can be a better option for the canon r50 camera, the canon rf-s 55-210 mm f5.0-7.1 is stm for the rf mount or the canon 55-250 mm f4-5.6 is stm using it with the mount adapter
Thanks for the video Chris. I bought this as part of a budget beginner wildlife kit along with a 40d. Not too fancy but less than $200 total and it makes a great training setup. The strong part of this lens to me is that it is well built for how light and plastic it is and they can be found for around $110 used. The autofocus seems really fast and precise for birds using a single AF point. Just instantly snaps into focus and it can even work around a few twigs. Now that I have my gateway drug I am looking at a 7dm2 or maybe even an R7 so it’s very helpful to know how this lens does with higher megapixel sensors.
@@zakharyhusak9326 same here but I am looking at the R7 first. Maybe. The R7(or R10) with this would give me a nice really portable package. My 40D doesn’t have much detail left to crop and that’s my major problem at the moment.
i dont know where you got the idea that it is 400mm equivalent , there is not equivalency here , its made for Crop sensors and Crop factor is already calculated in , its 55mm to 250, is exactly 5mm narrower then your FF 50mm nifty fifty , and its 250mm range is exactly the same as your 250mm FF lens , labeled as 250mm . I know this for i have it , and i have crop body , and i have 300mm Tair 3 for FF , and Tair is exactly 50mm more narrow , there is no Equivalency calculation here what so ever .
You are incorrect sir. Canon states that the 250mm focal length is indeed 400mm equivalent. You should spend a little time checking your facts before making wrong statements.
@@ronaldjohnston7989 took you long enough , i went on to check . Then check with my FF and DX bodies , and indeed they are faking us right up in the you know where , for a reason , for DX users to think they have 18mm when they dont , but then they give you long end , that you dont need . Its a fact indeed , faking us right in the you know where .
The sheer existence of this test is an indictment of Canon's APSC policy.
Christopher Frost is that you ? 😱
But they just released the RF-a equivalent, didn’t they?
@@julius4858 the minimum aperture is smaller (7.1 vs 5.6) and also a bit shorter than the ef-s version
@@julius4858 its 55-210 f6.3-7.1, absolutely garbage aperture
@@forrealtho06 I get the point about focal length, but people are saying the same about the aperture of the big 100-500 and the 800 f11. And both are absolutely excellent lenses in a multitude of ways. I’d never want to trade a kg or so of weight for a bit more light at the long end. The difference really isn’t as big as you may think. I feel like the people who always hate in the comment section never touched one of those RF pieces and just read off a spec sheet.
Loving the re-review reviews! Lots of older lenses out there that hold up quite well.
Interested in seeing what the R7 could do with the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8. Great video as always
Was thinking the same thing!
Would be great, if not for the very possible $1000 price tag
@@TrueKyanite It can be found used for something like $450
It will be little soft at 2.8, acceptable for most at 3.2, I’m sure someone on the internet was testing it on 90d
@@janholubicka7154 Oh, my mistake, I thought the comment was about Canon reintroducing a new 17-55 f/2.8 for RF. I'm not gonna pick it up, my 6D and nifty fifty is suiting me very well.
The original 'IS version II' is complete dog shit.
I have one that can't really sell because nobody wants the damn thing. It's noisy, soft, it rotates, rattles and it feels like it's going to break on its own weight... didn't like it, at all.
I suspect that this lens, like many, has a fair bit of variability in the manufacture. My copy is probably somewhat of a golden sample. It's one of my sharpest lenses, outperforming a few lenses that, according to various tests, should be sharper. Or maybe the copy tested here is a poor one.
Completely agree. My 55-250mm was sharper on a 90D than a 100-400mm Mark I was on a 5D Mark III.
Agreed, mine has always produced really sharp images, but i haven't done a test like these with an R7, so i can't really tell if it's better or not, on my M50 it looks great.
@@Al.j.VasquezI have an m50 as well and this lens performs very well! I also have an r6m11 but I haven’t tried it on there.
The Canon 55-250mm is my favorite lens. I bought mine refurbished directly from Canon for $99 and it producing amazing high quality images.
What lens do you still own?
Did it came with warranty?
@@cosmindanes9435 I don't believe it came with a warranty. It's over 5 years old and it never had an issue.
@@tomjanowski8584 price is awesome. What do you use it for?
This is a great intermediate quality lens. It came as a 2nd kit lens on some of the Canon crop cameras so there are a ton of them out there on the used market, often for less than usd 100. I'm keeping mine for a backup and a wildlife lens when I need a little more reach than my 135mm.
I still using that 700d and 55-250 lens,and the lens it's can do for portrait,macro, sports and street photography pretty much everything (daylight), results not amazing,not super sharp but it's still really good, it's also cheap...and beast for blur background
I have been very impressed with this lens on my M6 mark II, with its 32 MP sensor very similar to that in the R7. I don't think it's soft in the centre, and I really like it for larger wildlife, like polar bears. I recently bought the R7 with RF glass, but you're persuading to spring for the EF-RF adaptor to keep using this lens.
I'm rocking the same combo and I love it.
It's also surprisingly sharp for video.
I use it quite often on my 5D Mark III for any tele scenes.
I am the owner of this lens, and in general I would not say that the center of the image is so soft wide open. On the contrary, it is quite sharp. Some kind of defect lens you have, honestly
What body are you using it on?
Megapixel count makes a huge difference to perceived sharpness
back in his original review he did say it was sharp, i also owned two of them and it was indeed sharp
Same.
@@EverythingCameFromNothing lol no.
77D
@@matveym3900 “no” isn’t an intelligible answer to my question of “What body are you using it on?”
Your 77D is only 24 megapixels, the R7 is 32 megapixels, which would explain why this lens would appear sharper on your camera
Could you do a rereview for the Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM?
I had the older version of this lens, the IS II for my EOS 90D, which has the same 32 MP sensor. Especially zoomed in, the softness was easily noticeable even by someone like me.
That's when I gave in to my inner evil, and got the 70-300mm L lens. It's my first L lens, and boy oh boy is it fantastic!
Yes the 55-250 is soft especially on full zoom and wide open aperture , not suitable for wildlife
Old lens: 5:28 vs. New Lens: ruclips.net/video/C569xzh5N4k/видео.html
Scary how Canon manages to continually improve their budget lenses.
10 years ago the EF-S 55-250 IS STM was one of the best kit lenses ever made, I think an argument could be made it would still outperform the new RF-S 55-210 IS STM at the longest focal length given the extra 40mm of telephoto reach, but the new RF-S 55-210 certainly appears to be much more useful across its zoom range.
Isn't the newer rf 55-210mm darker? I am thinking to adapt this ef lens over the newer one. Should I do that? Portability isn't an issue for me, what do you think? RF or the older efs adapted...
@@anuragjha8962 The new lens is darker but anyone using the EF 55-250 will be stopping down to f8 as often as possible anyway.
The crazy thing about the EF 55-250 is that 5-6 years ago you could find it for $150 on black friday, at that price it was a must have for all EF shooters.
When both are the same price it's pretty safe to say the new RF 55-210 is the better buy.
@@anuragjha8962 Based on this test you would need to stop down to f8 anyway so unless you´re on a tight budget, i wouldnt bother adapting this ef-s lens.
I have this lens adapted onto my 24 megapixel m50, and I've never had any problems with a lack of sharpness. I've taken many good pictures with it. Maybe it's the jump to 32 megapixels that's the problem
I would love to see you retest the Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD which you tested quite long ago and gave a very positive review, I have been using the lens for the last 2 years and it has been amazing, but I don't really have a great point of comparison since that's the only long telephoto lens I've used. I would also love to you test it again with a more modern canon R camera since I still use a DSLR and would like to see how it would fair on a mirrorless camera if I ever chose to upgrade in the future (I'm not really planning that though).
We use this on the Fuji X H2 and it's pretty sharp, I'm not getting that blur at 55mm.
Dude I'm so glad you managed to find a new way to review all the lenses in the world again. I really loved it and I promise I'll see everything you post again.
Would love to see canon Ed’s 17-55 2.8 on R7. Thanks Chris
I wish I could find this lens in out market, it's so beautiful 😍
Current used price for this in the US is well under $100! A bargain with the understanding that a slow lens shines in daytime sunny locations. I'm in the market for a used 70-300 nano which will have a little more reach and build quality but may not improve image quality.
Thanks for the review. These are very informative for us trying to decide whether to move from an SLR with EF-S lenses (like the 90D). It'd be super helpful if you decided to try some third party lenses as well, like the Tamron 18-400 or Sigma 18-300. Cheers?
I have loved some the shots I've been able to get with this lens on my M50 MKII 7 32.5mp Canon M6 MKII! Great overall lens.
Amazing review as usual chris ❤ which one is better lens this efs 55-250 or the new RFs 55 210 ?
As prescribed the old one have wide aperture and more reach
We want a video about the Sigma 50-100mm lens on a Canon R7
This lens also works incredibly well on the 90D. I was having soft issues with my more expensive lenses until I realised that 90D only really works with post 2009 lenses and this one was released in 2013 so is brilliant. I bought it for £150 back in 2016 and now it sells on Amazon for £309 because it's just such a great lens. I would recommend using this with a flash for indoor wedding photography to be able to use the f8 aperture.
Lots of people rave about the sharpness of the 55-250 STM, but I think it's a dog on my M50. Not sure if I have a bad copy, but like you said, you have to go to f8 to get anything sharp out of it at longer lengths (which is where it primarily will be used), which makes it almost unusable in anything other than good day light. It's so bad I might end up taking the 70-300 mk1 away travelling with me. The whole reason I bought the 55-250 was for its small size and weight!
EDIT : other people are saying that they are getting good results - I imagine this cheaper lens probably suffers massively from sample variation...
I really miss this lens from my Canon DSLR days. It performed amazingly and gave me all of my best shots. A little sad to say but ive yet to find a fuji lens that offered the same level of price performance that this one did. Fuji lenses are EXPENSIVE 😭
I put a efs 18-135mm f3.5 /5.6 stm to my eos m6 mark ii that has 32,5 megapixels sensor.. and it cant handle the big megapixels sensor hahaha except for video.. its quite sharp
I’m surprised how soft this was!! It always performed well when I adapted it to my M6 Mark II, so I wonder if this was a soft copy? Oh well. I sold it long again and have no intention of buying one again.
It might unfortunately be a long while before I get to explore the R series...but until then, my 55-250 STM unit is still giving me great results on my EOS M6 :)
Thank you for this update Christopher! Keep'em coming! God bless.
0:57 It works on Canon 5D Mark III and Mark 4 with replaced lens bayonet and if to combine this lens with Kenko TELEPLUS HD DGX 1.4x Teleconverter, there will be no vignetting. With Canon 5D Mark III you may autofocus through Live View and with Canon 5D Mark IV it's fully compatible with all available auto focus points. And it produce pretty sharp images. If you wonder I left my review as a proof:
"Canon 55-250 (STM) vs Canon 100-400 (II), Kenko x1.4 Teleconverter for FF camera. Real life samples." ruclips.net/video/knHz7cZVBtU/видео.html
On my 77d, I always liked this lens...bought after your original view. I always found it sharper than a lens of this price/size should be! I miss it's light and compact size.
I adapted this lens onto my Canon R6 Mark II and it’s amazing. Being a crop sensor lens, the R62 automatically crops the full frame sensor. The STM motor works great with mirrorless autofocus.
Very curious how the features and handling compare to the other tele options for RF mount. Was hoping you would do a comparison. Absolute resolution isn’t everything, for me at least. On that note you say you are disappointed by the results but what other lens has sharper images for the same size and price?
Just got this lens new for £100 in 2024 for my EF-M system. Works great with the Viltrox adaptor. I considered the EF-M native Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM but decided to buy this EF-S version instead for the extra zoom and much better price and it works nicely on M50 and M6 II. I liked your initial review of this lens and checking now the nice revisit :)
Is buying this lens for $100 a good deal?
Yes!
@@lb7144 Then I guess it's a good thing I only had to pay $97 for it.
Like a few others here, I do use this lens with my M6II. Before this I was using a 24mp 200D and the images I got on that cam with this lens was so sharp wide open both at 55mm and 250mm. I do agree maybe the 32.5mp of my M6II (and the R7) pushes this lens a bit too far coz I did notice my images becoming a bit softer, but I'm also inclined to agree that there's definitely sample variations coz my images are not as soft as the ones here.
Still, a great re-review Chris! I'll continue using this till I save up enough for a 70-300 or 100-400 L lens :)
This was a great rereview. I have still have a Canon 70D and my EF-S 55-250mm. Any opinion on which would be a better upgrade? Getting the Canon R7 or upgrading the lens to a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8? Used they're the same price right now.
Hi, which do you recommend between Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM or EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM? I don't have money for an L version :(
Im using thos setup in 2024. Thank you for your lens reviews
This lens is one of my all time faves. My copy was sharp wide open
I just got my R7 and had to test this lens on a tripod, sure enough at 250mm f8 is a step up in contrast and sharpness.
Not having the exact same test chart I can't say if my copy is the same or better than Christopher has, but it's similar enough I'd vouch for his results.
Problem is the perception of image sharpness is different for everyone, if you're Ken Rockwell then this lens is sharper than a whole bag of razor blades and 10 years ago this level of image quality was revolutionary for a kit lens, you are genuinely going to get better images using this over an old EF 70-200 f2.8 zoom that costs $2,000 and weighs four times more.
Pretty sure the RF 70-200 f2.8 is in another class though.
Regardless, it's not that the lens is "sharp and f8 and blurry at f5.6" it's "sharp at f5.6 and tack sharp at f8".
@@budthecyborg4575 I mean for the money you pay for this lens and the performance you get out of it is definitely worth praising. Also, this lens was also a HUGE upgrade to its predecessor, I tried both and the stm version was just so much better.
I always recommend this version of 55-250 from canon to people who are asking me whats the best budget telephoto zoom lens they could buy for their crop sensor cameras.
Just picked this lens up for $90 used. Looking forward to testing it out with video on my R50.
If one could find this used for say 100€, its a great lens still!
So glad I chose the much smaller, slightly shorter, slightly darker 55-210 RF. It's way better, based on your review.
And this STM is quite expensive used.
used this lens could be around 80-140..
I got this lens for my canon R50 for 65 pounds and is using with meike adapter. The autofocus is so slow and pictures are not sharp
I don't know, sharpness seems fairly average to me. But I really don't like the rendering, lackluster stabilisation and the lack of luminosity, and that's much more important to me.. in comparison, the EF-S 10-18 is superb
Dude, that's completely different focal range lens, for a different purpose...
I miss that lens! It performed really well when paired with my old 80D!
Strange that during re-review the same lens became a little bit soft. Is it the camera body to blame or the copy of the lens is different?
The lens i use for my motorsports photography! Good lens, though I've seen its weakness in situations where i have to use max zoom. Aside from the obvious auto aperture adjustment that makes things underexposed, it's not as sharp as compared to using its mid focal lengths.. it also vignettes.
Thanks for the re-review! I have this lens on my R7 and was wondering how it compared to the new Canon RF-S 55-210mm f/5-7.1 IS STM. I watched both of your reviews back-to-back and decided the new lens is not improved enough to replace my EF-S 55-250mm IS STM lens. Slightly better image quality but a reduced zoom range and a smaller maximum aperture doesn't make jump up and proclaim "I must have it."
I'll save me tuppence for a more compelling lens. 🤠
Which one do you think I should choose if I was to invest in a new telephoto lens ? I don’t mind picking up a used one…
@@Louis-zk4bq I bought my Canon R7 with a RF-S IS 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 lens and found myself using the EF-S 55-250 lens less and less. I stopped putting the 55-250mm lens in my camera bag because when attached to the EF-RF adapter is was just too long to carry around all day.
Last month I sold the EF-S 55-250mm and my EF-S 17-55mm and my EF-S 24MM lenses.
I bought a Pentax MZ-3 film camera with the money. I have a dozen old Pentax lenses and I take a few rolls of film a year. I did not get rid of my Canon R-7.
So my biased advice to you Louis is if you have any Canon "R" mirrorless lens is to consider the extra size of an EF lens with a EF-RF adapter when shopping for a lens. 📸🙂
@@Nedski42YT So, to start in telephotography you advise me to go for the EF-S 55-250 for the price (its kind of a bargain)? The RF-S 55-210 just seems worse in every aspect (price,range, light,...) other than sharpness.
Or i could pick up (for a lot more money though) an EF 70-200 f/4L IS...
@@Louis-zk4bq Yup, the EF-S 55-250 seems objectively better but it is physically larger than the RF-S 55-210. You could always sell/trade the EF lens if/when you tire of it.
Oooo... I'd go for the RF70-200mm F4 L IS USM but I would have to sell my car!
sir, how about comparing with rfs55-210?
I making video for my channel with these lens. 😇
I love this lens.. new to cameras. Mine is allot sharper.. no clue why though
Great lens for its price, size and funtional zoom range. No need to use this at f4 anyway when it works its best and sharpest at f5.6. STM and IS functions also a great plus for video work. Still a great lens for the price 10years on.
55-250 or 18-135? which one is better. I want to use it with my M50 Mark II. I have a kit lens and an EFM of 22 mm.
I bought this lens, then returned it. Too soft. Bought the 70-200mm f/2.8 L III to replace it...🤗
Just as a speed booster narrows the picture from full frame to APS-C, a 1.4 converter widens the EF-S picture to full frame size. And also: the 1.4 converter does not stick out to damage the mirror. Only: Canon's and Sigma's converters stick out on the front, so that you still have to remove, widen or replace the plastic disk, but Kenko's converter does not stick out on either side. And the modern Canon R cameras regognize the Canon and Sigma (but not my Tamron!) EF-S lenses as APS-C and force a 1.6 crop. No way getting around it, as far as I know.
I had this lens for a couple years
Awesome lens
I took this lens to Africa in 2019. On my M6mkii, I took hundreds of pictures through our moving minibus windows and most were keepers. For the money and the weight, you won't find a better lens for a Canon APSC camera. I hope that the new RF-S 55-210mm f/5-7.1 IS STM is not considered to be a replacement for this lens.
It's suitable for canon 60d
. please reply me anyone
I am a wedding photographer (in the hall and people) and I shoot videos for RUclipsrs as well. I intend to open a channel, God willing. I have a Canon 850d, 50mm 1.8 and 24mm 2.8 lenses, and a kit lens 18-55. Would you advise me to update the camera to the 6dmii, or would you advise me to invest in better lenses? Is the 850 possible to get a professional job with me, or does it not mean that I can be a professional photographer with it? And if you advised me to invest in lenses, would you advise me, which lens should I buy? And if you advise me to get a new camera, which is the best option, knowing that I am a student and the budget is not the best thing? I will do associations and so on?😅 And thank you very much for the beautiful videos. I benefited a lot from you ♥️
The 55-250 lens of the latest STM version is the crown of technology, a very serious lens with a light weight. Competitors and canon itself have no modern analogues of this quality. It resolves 24 megapixels of the matrix, it does this even at maximum zoom. Photos from him can be cropped in a 1000 mm crop and posted on social networks, they will be very sharp. (the main thing to understand is that at a distance of more than one kilometer, the air itself will spoil the picture - this is physics! ) Moreover, it has a 1.4 converter from kenko hd, so the optics are so seriously resolved that the installation of this teleconvector does not spoil the final picture, a good convector + optics resolves with a margin.
I also like that he starts twisting the side at 250 mm, like a Russian Gelius.
Pictures from this lens looks better than we can see in tests. Anyway If you compare it to RF100-400, RF wins.
You know its strange.. how many different reviews there are that do not agree. Little things "very sharp" vs " not that sharp you will notice". Be nice if every lens was made exactly the same yet they are not. Then the cameras.. that plays a huge part then the person blah blah blah. But I just got it new for $145. Very sharp.. for me
i had this lens and the m50 mki for a few days and the images were amazing, surprisingly amazing and the contrast was amazing with the m50, even now i look compared to my L lenses and it's still look good
These RE-reviews of EF lenses on newer Canon R cameras is interesting as well helpful !!
Would love to see a review of the Canon EF 300 2.8 IS mk 1 on a R7 or R5 .
Keep up the good work/s 👍🏻🙂
I love these reviews too!
I'm pretty disappointed with the image quality of this lens. Tried doing some light wildlife photography with it the other day and a lot of the pictures were soft or out of focus. Even at f8 it's not that sharp and the AF isn't the best either
Which lens would you recommend as a direct replace for this if you were upgrading to an R7?
I must have a great copy because it's ridiculously sharp on my m6ii. I have two minor gripes. It occasionally hunts, or even fails to find focus for no apparent reason and vignetting at 5.6.
Because of you I decided to buy this lens for $100. Best money I ever spent.
Can you re-test this on M50 Mark ii or any new 24mp Canon and compare against 32mp...you may get surprising results
Love your reviews Christopher. It is marvellous that they always focus on the equipment, not on you!
This last review confused me a bit though, you pretty much raved about this lens in 2014 on a 20Mp camera, but now are saying that based on your 32Mp tests that it would likely be pretty mediocre on 20Mp...? I always wonder too about target image testing such as that which you now do. Does such testing not constrain the distance to target and thus perhaps indicate somewhat different performance from real world tests at different focal distances. Were your older reviews of the brick building done in real outdoor conditions or were they also of a target - also, if they were outdoors, was focus distance different from those done with your current test target? Overall though, really do enjoy and trust your reviews. Thank you for the great work!
Before upgrading to Canon RP, I had Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 and Sigma 17-50mm F2.8. I would like to see Christ do re-review on the R7.
Now, I am still keeping the Tokina 11-16mm as I still don't have the budget for the RF 16mm lens.
any r7 anything video is great! Im struggling with an EF 70-300 and 70-400 f4 L in the miami heat lol
a used one should cost around 110-130$ which is very appealing for asp-c peasants :)
the nikon z 50-250 is definitely sharper and produces a better image than this lens
Great all day carry telephoto because its so darn light. You can find a lot of these lenses preowned at bargain basement prices now.
can u make a video adapting this lens to sony e mount please? i was using a6400 and wanted to buy a telephoto lens, thanks 😊
Great review! How does this lens perform with R7’s focus tracking in dynamic situations? Is it effective/fast enough?
32mp sensors keep decrowning the kings of aps-c! too bad, I was hoping for this one to hold its own
it works fine on my x-h1(with an adapter) as well, with no visible vignetting
I own this lens and I got it paired with my canon m6 ii I get crazy sharpness from it for bird photography
This is great! I'm looking at getting the R7 body (no longer considering the RP) and coming from the old DSLR Rebel T5i with the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens AND the EF-S 55-250mm featured here, it's great to see your Re-review for the 55-250. It was an impulse buy 10 years ago when I purchased it and it's great to see it's still somewhat useful when stopping down. I would love to see a Re-review on the 18-55mm as I'm considering on keeping those lenses, along with the 50mm EF f1.8 I purchased years later. Keep up the great work with the Re-reviews!
Still waiting for old school sigma 17-50 2.8 + r7 combo 😘
I think a re-review of the Canon EF-40mm pancake lens would be very interesting!
I had almost bought this lens for my M50. The Canon guy had told me that the 70-300mm was sharper and I got that one and I am still pleased with the purchase.
I got mine off ebay for $95, had it for three months and it works amazingly well.
I have this lens shortly bought after it's release - its my go-to zoom onto my EOS 40D/50D, still.
Fantastic walkaround lens with the R7 with a raynox R 150 or R 250 for real macro/small mamals/nearby birds and landscapes/plants. I haven´s yet found a lens this versatile with a low weight and with the same sharpnes to fit my R7 (and my raynox lenses). It´s my No 1 choise when i want to walk around lightweight and be able to shot always anything (but wide angle shots).
Hello Christopher. Thank you very much for your excellent videos! I'm excited about the different camera-lens combinations you've already tested. I shoot with a Canon R5 and am thinking about getting a Canon EF 28-300 L. Have you had any experience with this combination or could you even make a video about it? In any case, I would be very happy about it. Thanks a lot - keep up the good work!
Can you say how the lens IS works together with the IBIS on non-RF lenses?
Hope you can do the test with Tamron 18-400mm on R7.
Yes it has wobbly if u shake it due to its Optical stabilization on the lens hehe
Your review is always trust worthy
which of these two lenses can be a better option for the canon r50 camera, the canon rf-s 55-210 mm f5.0-7.1 is stm for the rf mount or the canon 55-250 mm f4-5.6 is stm using it with the mount adapter
Good question
Love these re-reviews!
Thanks for the video Chris. I bought this as part of a budget beginner wildlife kit along with a 40d. Not too fancy but less than $200 total and it makes a great training setup. The strong part of this lens to me is that it is well built for how light and plastic it is and they can be found for around $110 used. The autofocus seems really fast and precise for birds using a single AF point. Just instantly snaps into focus and it can even work around a few twigs. Now that I have my gateway drug I am looking at a 7dm2 or maybe even an R7 so it’s very helpful to know how this lens does with higher megapixel sensors.
I'm running this on my 7dm2 and have gotten some pretty amazing results, although I'm now eyeing an upgrade to a 150-600mm from sigma or tamron
@@zakharyhusak9326 same here but I am looking at the R7 first. Maybe. The R7(or R10) with this would give me a nice really portable package. My 40D doesn’t have much detail left to crop and that’s my major problem at the moment.
@@zakharyhusak9326 How is the cropping ability with the 7Dmii?
i dont know where you got the idea that it is 400mm equivalent , there is not equivalency here , its made for Crop sensors and Crop factor is already calculated in , its 55mm to 250, is exactly 5mm narrower then your FF 50mm nifty fifty , and its 250mm range is exactly the same as your 250mm FF lens , labeled as 250mm . I know this for i have it , and i have crop body , and i have 300mm Tair 3 for FF , and Tair is exactly 50mm more narrow , there is no Equivalency calculation here what so ever .
You are incorrect sir. Canon states that the 250mm focal length is indeed 400mm equivalent. You should spend a little time checking your facts before making wrong statements.
@@ronaldjohnston7989 took you long enough , i went on to check . Then check with my FF and DX bodies , and indeed they are faking us right up in the you know where , for a reason , for DX users to think they have 18mm when they dont , but then they give you long end , that you dont need .
Its a fact indeed , faking us right in the you know where .
Yes! Been waiting for this one. Thanks!
18-55 IS looking forward to be re-reviewed 😂