55-250 STM or SP 70-300 VC

I know, I know... You'd go with the L glass.. But here's the deal... I "need" a longer lens to complement what I already own. But, I'm only going to use this lens perhaps 1 percent of the time... How do I know that? Currently, the longest lens in my kit is a 15-85 and the 85 is generally too long for my tastes. Why do I want a longer lens? Specifically for when I need that reach.. Like at the zoo and such.. Eventually, when my 2 yr old daughter plays sports, I'd need a better lens, but that's at least a decade away... And by then, I'd probably splurge for the L glass...

Why these two lenses? Why not.. I don't think that spending a bunch of money for something that I'm (probably) barely going to use seems silly to me... These two lenses are basically the same price.. I would consider the 55-250 IS I/II as well, but I would hope that the focus motor on the Tamron and STM versions would be better even if the IQ would be quite similar.

Why I like the 55-250... The short end... 55 is a bit long as my main lens that I use 90% of the time is 30mm.. Why I like the 70-300? The long end... I like the idea of the longer reach.. Granted 50mm isn't a huge difference, but it's a difference...

So the simple question, is this... Which of the two (technically three) would you choose and why?

Thanks in advance!

My gear is a gripped T3i, 30mm 1.4 (90% used), 50mm 1.8 (0%), 15-85 3.5-5.6 (10%)...

Of the two, and with your details, I'd go with the Tamron myself. They make good lenses and their VC system is much better, IMO, than Canon's IS.

You have overlap in both lenses, with your 15-85; but there's less overlap with the 70-300, meaning you'll be more likely to only mount it when you actually need the range and not find yourself swapping lenses when you didn't intend to be.

These comments have to do with the Tamron SP70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di VC. There is an older 70-300 that I have no experience with but those that have are generally unimpressed.

That said, the 70-300 Di VC is as good as it gets until you get to the Canon 70-300 L at about $1300. And it's a great buy. It outperforms any similar Canon at that price or below. It is reasonably light (for its FL range) and pretty easy to hand hold. It has full time manual, the stabilization is excellent, the front element doesn't turn when you focus, and everything fits well. IQ is excellent to 200mm and only slightly less at 300mm. It's got two flaws. It focus a little slowly at 300mm IN BAD LIGHT, and it's just barely big enough to benefit from a tripod foot which it doesn't have.

I don't have any first hand knowledge of the 55-250, but can highly recommend the Tamy.

I have the 55-250 IS mk2
No problems with it at all.
It's also very lightweight, so easy to caryy around when not needed.

The 55-250 stm is a different animal than the prior versions. It sounds like a few folks may not aware of that. Given the specs that sites are showing, it is quite the performer. Also there isn't much difference between 250 and 300mm.

rgs wrote in post #16364403
That said, the 70-300 Di VC is as good as it gets until you get to the Canon 70-300 L at about $1300. And it's a great buy. It outperforms any similar Canon at that price or below.

At 300mm, in the center, on full frame, the Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS is sharper than the Tamron according to TDP:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=4​&APIComp=3

For whatever reason, TDP has no crop camera test for the Tamron.

I have never had the pleasure of using the Tamron, but users' reviews are quite positive and it costs less than the Canon.

In my personal experience with the 55-250 (non-STM) vs.the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS, the latter is better. The TDP test results on the 60D as to each agree as well.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=4​&APIComp=3

The 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS fares even better on full frame. Here's an unfair comparison by showing the 70-300f/4-5.6 on full frame vs. the 55-250 STM on the 60D but the former blows way the latter.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=4​&APIComp=3

Of course, generally speaking, the non-L 70-300 is not in the same class as the L version of the 70-300 but, if you are using a crop such as the 60D, according to the following, you'd be hard pressed to see a real difference in the center at 300mm between the L and the non-L. See here:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=4​&APIComp=3

at f/11, @300mm, they also appear to be very close (the L and the non-L) in the center:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=4​&APIComp=4

Notwithstanding all I have discussed above, maybe I should rent the Tamron and see what the excitement is about!

Thanks all for the input.. I did try and do some unfair comparisons at the tdp site... But, as was said.. It's a little unfair... Maybe not unfair, but not apples to apples either...

Additional positives to the Tamron which the STM doesn't have..
Includes hood
Metal mount
Usable on full frame (IF I ever decide to go that route)
6 year warranty

I am assuming there is a DPP lens correction for the STM. I am sure there isn't one for the Tamron since there isn't one for my Sigma.. But then again, there isn't one for the nifty-fifty either so... That's a toss up...

I think I am slowly but surely answering my own question even though I really want the STM to be the lens...

Moonshiner wrote in post #16364353
Eventually, when my 2 yr old daughter plays sports, I'd need a better lens, but that's at least a decade away... And by then, I'd probably splurge for the L glass...

My daughter is 3 and playing soccer already so it's probably a lot closer than a decade away. My 70-200 gets a lot of use there. If you are planning on upgrading at some point and can afford it now, just get the L glass. If you can't afford it now, get a used 55-250 I or II. They are great lenses for the money and you will be out nearly nothing when you do upgrade and sell it.

Tough call. For zoo shots, I don't think the focusing motor matters much. I'd save myself a lot of cash and get the non-STM 55-250. They can be had for really cheap, especially if bought used. If/when you get more serious about shooting with a telephoto, then you can look into a 70-200/300mm L option.

Found these comments in another thread by someone who owns a 55-250 STM
This may be helpful for the OP to narrow down between the two

I didn't have a cooperative bird to experiment on but here are my experiments:

55mm with hand held in front of lens to force hunting (full zoom out then in)
II: long, loud 1s hunt back and forth
STM: silent, near-instantaneous hunt back and forth

250mm with hand held in front of lens to force hunting
II: same long, loud 1s hunt back and forth
STM: silent but only a slightly faster (10-15% faster maybe) hunt back and forth than the II. For some reason full zoom in/out is almost as slow at 250mm as the II. At 200mm or so it's in between the 55mm and 250mm speeds, so it slows down more dramatically at the long end for a full hunt cycle.

That said, the STM focuses much smoother than the II. In servo mode the II makes that fast "chitter" sound like a broken robot and after each chitter you don't have much confidence in the focus because it jumped around so much. The STM is smooth and you have more confidence in it's ability to make small accurate focus adjustments. I'd bet that there are general focus algorithm improvements with the STM on newer bodies like other new lenses are getting.

Plus you have silent full time manual focus on the STM that works as well as the 18-135 STM (which is a great lens.) The 40 STM manual focus is loud and laggy. I just tested and the 40mm hunt speed is as bad as the II. I went and tested the 18-135 STM hunt speeds and they're about the same as the 55-250 STM--lightning fast at 18 and slow at 135.

I have he newer tamron 70-300vc. Photos come out amazing. One of my favorite lenses.

Eastport wrote in post #16365022
At 300mm, in the center, on full frame, the Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS is sharper than the Tamron according to TDP:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=4​&APIComp=3

TDP must have an issue with the Tamron at 300mm. TDP is the reason I was a bit concerned at first, but the many excellent real examples made me try the lens (I always try before buying). It was very good. It's sharp at 300mm f/5.6 (biggest aperture). It's not super sharp like a 300mm prime, obviously, and it's sahrper at f/8, but I would sitll say it's sharp at f/5.6. IMO it's better than the Canon equivalent.

I have posted examples showing how my lens is not anywhere near as soft as what TDP shows it to be at 300mm. You can find it or I can post again if interested.

I was concerned also when I read the TDP review, but there are far too many good reports of the Tamy to ignore and mine has been great. It is not soft at all. TDP may have had a bad copy of the lens. At 300mm on a crop camera, and any softness is far more likely to be the result of camera shake, shallow DOF, or missed focus (use MFA) than softness in the optics.

I have the Tamron VC. Amazing bargain of a lens at it's price. The VC works extremely well. It has some heft to it and doesn't feel like a cheap lens.

Moonshiner wrote in post #16365085
I did try and do some unfair comparisons at the tdp site.

Even the fair comparisons (60D on both) show the 55-250 STM to be only slightly worse or nearly identical to the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS - and that makes the $350 STM lens a deal. But, since you can easily get the $650 70-300 used for less than $350, I don't see the clear attraction of the STM lens over the 70-300 - except it is quieter for video.

So, if you want wider, lighter and a better video lens - get the 55-250 STM OR

If you want better built, full frame, heavier, longer range, possibly better IQ - get the 70-300 f/4-5.6 (or the Tamron)

70-300 beats the STM at 200mm, clearly - http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=4​&APIComp=3

They are closer at 135mm, but the 70-300 still wins:http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=3​&APIComp=3

Just because the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS beats the Tamron when using both on the full frame does not mean the same result would be achieved when testing both on a crop but these test results can't be ignored for those looking at the Tamron because it is a full frame lens:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=4​&APIComp=3