08-31-2011, 03:05 PM
I own a 55-250. My lens is quite sharp. At 250 mm wide open it's slightly soft, but stopping down to f/8 helps a lot.
I don't have a 70-200/4 but I've used it; my friend owns one. What the extra money buys you is:
The 55-250 gets you IS, of course, which the plain-jane 70-200 doesn't have.
I consider the 70-200 to be mainly a portrait lens. The 55-250 is a jack-of-all-trades telephoto zoom (landscape detail, portrait, various stuff).
I don't have a 70-200/4 but I've used it; my friend owns one. What the extra money buys you is:
- Better build.
- Better AF. Ring USM.
- Much better bokeh. The 55-250 is not bad at 250 mm but at lower focal lengths (especially the middle of the range) it's doughnut city.
- A tad more aperture.
The 55-250 gets you IS, of course, which the plain-jane 70-200 doesn't have.
I consider the 70-200 to be mainly a portrait lens. The 55-250 is a jack-of-all-trades telephoto zoom (landscape detail, portrait, various stuff).