55-200 4.5-5.6 II USM - opinions?

[puttick]

Now I know from this forum that the 50-200 L lens is an old (and not highly rated) model, I am wondering about the "new" 55-200 that seems aimed at the 300d owner (i.e. like me). I assume that many people have this lens - so how do you find it? Contrast, sharpness, distortion, at both ends of the range? Overall impressions? Are you happy with it? The effective FL of 85-320 seems ideal, but at this size and price there must have been some compromise...

Thanks
Nigel

[Volatile]

I'm no expert, but I'll try to lay this down by ranking them in order: (best to worst)

1. 70-200 f2.8L IS --> $1600
2. 70-200 f2.8L -----> $1100
3. 70-200 f4L -------> $550
4. 75-300 f4-5.6 IS -> $400
5. 55-200 f4.5-5.6 -->$200
6. 75-300 f4-5.6 ----> $150

Generally, I think you get what you pay for in this focal length range. My friend has the 55-200, he likes it, and it has a definite advantage in the compactness department.

Hope this helps...

[puttick]

...no new opinions on this lens? I have the 70-200 f4 L but would also like a compact lens for those situations where weight and bulk are an issue (like a 10 day backpacking trip in the Alps)

Nigel

[FrenchAmateur]

I will go through my tests in order to check, but the quality cannot be compared with the 70-200...
If you want to save weight and space, have a look at the 28-300 Sigma, which is not bad optically.

[puttick]

I had a Tamron 28-200 XR which was just OK on film but no good on the 300d digital body (very soft and visible fringing). I don't really want to go there again (the Sigma has a 10.2:1 zoom ratio so I would expect similarly poor results). The 55-200 is a 3.5:1 zoom and is small & light. I know it will not equal the 70-200/4L which I already have - but it would be a lot easier to carry, it is compatible with the 300d and I liked an 80-200 4-5.6 mk II that I used to own (but never tried on digital). Surely someone must have tried one with a 300d and have results to report?

[Volatile]

My friend uses his with his 10D. But that in and of itself is an indication that it will work with the 300D.

[boBquincy]

I have both the 55-200 (I) and the 70-200 f4 L. I had hoped the L lens was not that much better than the 55-200 so I could return it, but... no comparison, particularly when wide open.

However...the 55-200 is much better than I expected, especially for the price, and it is pretty good when stopped down. I still carry it when I am short on space in the camera bag and it's a bright sunny day.

If you're short on funds (aren't we all?) and don't need f4 (or 5.6) then the 55-200 should keep you happy.


boB

[FrenchAmateur]

Send me an pm in order to remind me to check the tests made in the French Magazine Chasseur d'images.
If you can read basic French, send your E-mail adress and I will scan them and send them to you.
But I think (sorry to insist) that the Sigma is better...