Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Canon 18-200 f3.5/5.6 or 55-250 f4/5.6

  1. #1

    Default Canon 18-200 f3.5/5.6 or 55-250 f4/5.6

    Hi all, I'll to get some advice as to which would be a better lens..

    I take mainly people and landscape in my travel.

    Understand from some review that >200mm, the saturation is not good on the 55-250.
    I'm in a dilemma cos I have a 17-50 tamron 2.8, so 18-200 will have duplicate focal length and its also more expensive than 55-250. If I get the 18-200, my feel is it'll be tempting to just keep the 18-200 on and the 17-50 becomes redundant..though I like the f2.8.

    I'm however concerned about the optical quality of the 55-250. Main advantages are longer and cheaper.

    These are my first sets of equipment, which I know eventually I'll have to upgrade in this lifelong passion I want to keep the budget low and learn as much before upgrading.

    I tried to search the forum but couldn't find anything on this.

    Thanks in advance!


  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007

    Default Re: Canon 18-200 f3.5/5.6 or 55-250 f4/5.6


    Cheaper. No focal length overlap at all. Quality is assured from 55-200mm (ie 250mm it's not very good).

    It's a sharp lens that takes sharpening quite well, if you're someone who post processes your stuff.
    Our pictures are our footprints. Itís the best way to tell people we were here - JoeMcnally | Flickr

  3. #3

    Default Re: Canon 18-200 f3.5/5.6 or 55-250 f4/5.6

    Keep the 17-50. Get the 55-250.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Canon 18-200 f3.5/5.6 or 55-250 f4/5.6

    I've had a 55-250 inmy dry box for a good 3-4 months now and have yet to use it. Test shots were quite good, and I'm just hoping some day I will travel and choose to bring it. I prefer my 100 mm macro since it's optically better than the zoom, and the key factor is the ability to focus up close, meaning you travel and find something in front of you, you can photograph it easily without having to worry whether it's too close, without switching lens. Too bad it's a bit slow in terms of focusing speed, but the large aperture is a boon.

    Maybe I should just bring the 55-250 out everyday and try.
    Research Institute for Unicultural Visual Arts -

  5. #5

    Default Re: Canon 18-200 f3.5/5.6 or 55-250 f4/5.6

    The 18-200 is a more of a all in one travel lens. Like travel tripods, it doesn't offer the best performance, but it offers the best convenience. Your 17-50 is good for low light and many other purposes, but when you want to travel light, all you need is a 18-200 and a body. If you intend to get the 55-250, you might be tempted to upgrade to the 70-200 series in the future. But if you get the 18-200, you don't really have another better alternative lens that can fully replace it, (lets not talk about the 28-300L) unless you intend to lug your heavy equipments overseas.

    Ultimately, it's up to you!

  6. #6

    Default Re: Canon 18-200 f3.5/5.6 or 55-250 f4/5.6

    Thank you all for the sound advices.

    I think I'll decide on the 55-250mm for now. I like the 17-50 too much to give it up at the moment. Upgrade will be inevitable should focus on the skills




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts