Beginner Which zoom?

AdamTudor

AdamTudor

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,121
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
Yes
So i'm currently rocking a 60d with 85mm 1.8 and 17-50 2.8 and want a bit of extra reach in my arsenal..

Options are Canon 55-250 IS STM or Tamron 70-300 Di VC USD.

Will be used for photos of the kids, pets, wild animals where possible and just general shots etc. I know both are reviewed as pretty good lenses but does anyone have experience with both? Price isn't much difference with the canon to be had for £149 and the tamron for £239 (amazon and wex cheaper than digitalrev on the tamron haha.) so cost isn't too much of an issue there, and I also have no plans/need to move to FF any time soon.

What would peoples thoughts be on this/these lenses? Any other possibilities without much extra cost?
 
I used to own the Canon and thought it was a nice lens and would recommend it, no experience with the Tamron though.
 
The price of the canon is nice and tempting me as I can then buy something else with spare cash but don't want to jeopardise the range or possibly better quality of the tamron
 
Much less range though, not sure how much that would affect me.. and do we not think white lenses look bit odd haha?
 
If zoom length is a concern they work OK with a teleconverter, and you get a lens which is both superb and will hold its value properly. And the white lens will get knowing looks from other photographers.
 
The canon 70-200mm f4 a great lens, used price about £300-400, another lens to look at is the sigma 100-300mm f4, great lens, fast focusing, like the 70-200mm, a significant jump up in quality from ether of the 2 lenses you mention, although they hold their own for the price you pay for them
 
...and no IS to go wrong either!

The 55-250IS is a very good lens for its price point, but a little bit more buys into some very good lenses which you can still use on a FF camera, the EF-S 55-250 you can't.
 
andrewc said:
...and no IS to go wrong either!
Click to expand...

True

Personally I couldn't justify the cost as I rarely shoot above the 55mm focal length, and also I don't really like lugging a tripod about so the IS is really handy. If you are somebody who shoots above that regularly then it is definitely worth going for something better
 
I'll look into the other 2 mentioned. Not considered that sigma before
 
I'd go the tamron route if you can afford it better built lens with more reach the only reason to go with the canon is price.
 
Tamron would be my advice. Great lens for a good price. Sharp and with good reach. I lobe mine.
 
Yeah even amazon and jessops have it at 239 yet panamoz and digitalrev are 259+
 
AdamTudor said:
So i'm currently rocking a 60d with 85mm 1.8 and 17-50 2.8 and want a bit of extra reach in my arsenal..

Options are Canon 55-250 IS STM or Tamron 70-300 Di VC USD.

Will be used for photos of the kids, pets, wild animals where possible and just general shots etc. I know both are reviewed as pretty good lenses but does anyone have experience with both? Price isn't much difference with the canon to be had for £149 and the tamron for £239 (amazon and wex cheaper than digitalrev on the tamron haha.) so cost isn't too much of an issue there, and I also have no plans/need to move to FF any time soon.

What would peoples thoughts be on this/these lenses? Any other possibilities without much extra cost?
Click to expand...

They are both very good lenses, but the price you're looking at for the 55-250 looks like it's for the non-STM version. There are two Canon 55-250s and while they look exactly the same they are optically and mechanically totally different. STM version is significantly better.

The biggest difference between the Canon STM and Tamron VC is probably a bit of zoom range and the Tamron is much bigger.
 
no that is for the stm version on digitalrev. It's recently dropped from £190
 
What's that Adam?
The price? Oh sorry about that, just sell the camera as well & you'll have some more money.
Can't see a problem there, can you? :rolleyes:
 
Haha is a bit costly. Are the l series super zoom any good? Never really see anyone mention them. For that price they should be ....
 
On a more sensible note & just in your budget
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 APO DG MACRO HSM EX CANON FIT
£399.99 & £4.99 p+p with a 6 month warranty...
It has a tripod collar as well & remember it's f/2.8 right through!
So take the collar off, they have a quick release button to press once loosened, when hand holding or just twist it round out of the way.
 
AdamTudor said:
Haha is a bit costly. Are the l series super zoom any good? Never really see anyone mention them. For that price they should be ....
Click to expand...

Not that one, the previous version (35-350mm) was much better, but you would be better off getting the 70-300mm L than that lens, but that's still well above your budget.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
They are both very good lenses, but the price you're looking at for the 55-250 looks like it's for the non-STM version. There are two Canon 55-250s and while they look exactly the same they are optically and mechanically totally different. STM version is significantly better.

The biggest difference between the Canon STM and Tamron VC is probably a bit of zoom range and the Tamron is much bigger.
Click to expand...

The reviews I've seen don't put the STM version far off the original with the only significant difference being a faster af motor and a non-rotating front element. STM is also a bit of a love it or hate it thing if you use MF as it is electronically coupled rather than physically connected.

The tamron lens benefits from the apsc sweet spot so you get much lower fall off in the corners, it is sharper across the apsc frame as well. I prefer the build as well you get a proper metal mount and better construction throughout.
 
retrosi said:
On a more sensible note & just in your budget
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 APO DG MACRO HSM EX CANON FIT
£399.99 & £4.99 p+p with a 6 month warranty...
It has a tripod collar as well & remember it's f/2.8 right through!
So take the collar off, they have a quick release button to press once loosened, when hand holding or just twist it round out of the way.
Click to expand...

You can get them brand new for £30.00 or so more. I posted the offer on the bargains thread last week, in case of any use to Canon users

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/sigma-70-200-f2-8-canon-fitting-£429-00-new.570722/

http://ffordes.com/product/10072316358378
 
Last edited:
This is an ex display so if only £30 more and of course a full warranty it would be better. The full price for this from this shop was another £50 and so I thought given most lenses don't pack up it was worth the difference.
 
a1ex2001 said:
The reviews I've seen don't put the STM version far off the original with the only significant difference being a faster af motor and a non-rotating front element. STM is also a bit of a love it or hate it thing if you use MF as it is electronically coupled rather than physically connected.

The tamron lens benefits from the apsc sweet spot so you get much lower fall off in the corners, it is sharper across the apsc frame as well. I prefer the build as well you get a proper metal mount and better construction throughout.
Click to expand...

I've MTF tested the Tamron 70-300 VC and both STM and non-STM versions of the Canon 55-250. Compared to non-STM, the STM Canon is a lot sharper at the edges and right across the frame at 250mm. STM focusing mech is much better than the rather crude Canon micro-motor drive on the non-STM, in AF or manual.

Compared to the Tamron VC, you can practically overlay the sharpness graphs with the Canon STM. They're very similar indeed on APS-C format. You really have to compare the two in your hand - the Canon STM is a little gem of a lens, half the weight of the Tamron VC.
 
There's a Tamron 70-300 VC for sale on here £180 del, I checked out the samples and it looks a good copy
 
HoppyUK said:
I've MTF tested the Tamron 70-300 VC and both STM and non-STM versions of the Canon 55-250. Compared to non-STM, the STM Canon is a lot sharper at the edges and right across the frame at 250mm. STM focusing mech is much better than the rather crude Canon micro-motor drive on the non-STM, in AF or manual.

Compared to the Tamron VC, you can practically overlay the sharpness graphs with the Canon STM. They're very similar indeed on APS-C format. You really have to compare the two in your hand - the Canon STM is a little gem of a lens, half the weight of the Tamron VC.
Click to expand...
Interesting, different to what I had read previously about the stem 55-250 I may need to dig a little deeper.
 
a1ex2001 said:
Interesting, different to what I had read previously about the stem 55-250 I may need to dig a little deeper.
Click to expand...

Unless it's the same reviewer, using the same (robust) methodology and, crucially, the same camera - results cannot be compared.
 
Iv always read good reviews about the stm. The only thing that seems to let it down in most reviews is build quality
 
HoppyUK said:
Unless it's the same reviewer, using the same (robust) methodology and, crucially, the same camera - results cannot be compared.
Click to expand...
You would however like to think that the results would be broadly similar among different reviewers!
 
a1ex2001 said:
You would however like to think that the results would be broadly similar among different reviewers!
Click to expand...

You would hope so, but there is huge inconsistency out there ranging from professional reviewers who ought to know what they're doing, to bloggers that, in very many cases, simply don't. My lens reviews are only available in print magazines.

The plastic lens mount of the Canon STM always gets picked out, and conclusions about overall build quality are drawn from that, quite wrongly (unless you're a professional, changing lenses all day and everyday). A more telling test is how much the barrel wobbles at full extension and on that score the STM is as solid as they come.

I'm not particularly carrying a torch for the STM though. It's a great little lens, sharp and light weight, mainly because it's an EF-S design. Tamron 70-300 VC is also excellent, easily the best of the third-party 70-300 zooms, better than the non-L Canon, good value and almost on a par with the Nikon VR. Both lenses are sharp at the long end, and that's where all rivals fall down.
 
Thanks for all the input guys. Definitely food for thought
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top