70-300L vs 55-250 STM

I have 70-300L, I know this lens is superb in IQ and built Quality, but it is more heavy. If I go out with all my gear, 70-300 is the less usage. I feel no need to carry this weight for my travel and hiking, so I plan to sell 70-300 and replace with 55-250 stm with 100D.
I saw a lot of good things for 55-250 stm at internet review, anyone have both lens to compare?

If weight is a concern, then this combo seems like a good alternative. I have been thinking of picking up an SL1 along with the trio of STM kit lenses (I already have the 40).

jrscls wrote in post #17054524
If weight is a concern, then this combo seems like a good alternative. I have been thinking of picking up an SL1 along with the trio of STM kit lenses (I already have the 40).

weight is first concern if go hiking & camping trip, my backpack is around 20KG, reduce weight mean reduce burden.
I also have same plan. 10-18 stm+40 stm+ 55-250 stm.
10-18STM can modified to use on 6D, extra bonus, anyone modified 55-250 to use on ff body?

Heya,

What kind of stuff do you shoot when you're hiking?

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17054547
Heya,

What kind of stuff do you shoot when you're hiking?

Very best,

landscape, people, flower or plant, insects, animal or birds(the chance is low and normally 300mm nor 400mm is no long enough).
6d+24-70 F4 suit my 90% need, sometime I have good luck to meet interesting bird or animal, so need a telephoto to standby anytime, 70mm too wide for that.

tat3406 wrote in post #17054561
landscape, people, flower or plant, insects, animal or birds(the chance is low and normally 300mm nor 400mm is no long enough).
6d+24-70 F4 suit my 90% need, sometime I have good luck to meet interesting bird or animal, so need a telephoto to standby anytime, 70mm too wide for that.

Heya,

SL1 with the 55-250 STM attached to it is as compact as it gets for an SLR with a field of view close to 400mm (full frame). It's light weight and small enough to fit in where normally a big telephoto would take up the whole space.

Pair with something that goes wide to normal view, and you'd be set.

I carry two cameras when I'm out in the swamp. I carry an APS-C with my telephoto, and an EOS-M with something wider for the rest.

Very best,

I bought my SL1 today, with the 18-55 and 55-250mm STM lenses. A very compact and capable outfit.

The 55-250 is not going to be long enough most of the time for frame-filling bird shots. We really need around 400mm for that on a crop-frame body. It might be successful at times. It's so lightweight, so it's an OK tradeoff if the main purpose of the outing is not bird photography.

The 55-250 at 250mm and with the 500D closeup lens mounted gives sharp closeup results. It gives a max magnification of about 0.67. Example below.

I see quite a bit of CA with the tele zoom, but Lightroom is fixing that satisfactorily.

I don't have enough experience yet with the 18-55mm to know how close it will get to the 17-55 f2.8, but so far I don't see any problems.

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

you could go with an EOS-m set up...11-22mm 22f2, or 40mm with adapter, and their new 55-200mm

I don't think the 55-250 is compatible with your 6D

DreDaze wrote in post #17054679
you could go with an EOS-m set up...11-22mm 22f2, or 40mm with adapter, and their new 55-200mm

I have also think about eos-m system, love the 22f2 very much. But I like to have ovf and 100D have better grip. 55-200 still not available in my country, will see how this lens performance. I will follow closely what M camera Canon bring out.

davem01 wrote in post #17054702
I don't think the 55-250 is compatible with your 6D

There is not big deal, unless I need high ISO from 6D.

Archibald wrote in post #17054674
I bought my SL1 today, with the 18-55 and 55-250mm STM lenses. A very compact and capable outfit.

The 55-250 is not going to be long enough most of the time for frame-filling bird shots. We really need around 400mm for that on a crop-frame body. It might be successful at times. It's so lightweight, so it's an OK tradeoff if the main purpose of the outing is not bird photography.

The 55-250 at 250mm and with the 500D closeup lens mounted gives sharp closeup results. It gives a max magnification of about 0.67. Example below.

I see quite a bit of CA with the tele zoom, but Lightroom is fixing that satisfactorily.

I don't have enough experience yet with the 18-55mm to know how close it will get to the 17-55 f2.8, but so far I don't see any problems.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

I understand 250mm was not enough for bird but still better than my currently 6D with 300mm. In the market now, all lens beyond 300mm was heavy and bulky. I think I will buy body only, I have 24-70F4 L for normal range and close up, I am more interest the latest ef-s 10-18 stm. Then I will have 2 body cover FL from 16-400mm, and no need buy a new bay to carry those gear.

I used the older 55-250 without STM on my 7d. Iq was good. Not sure if it was my imagination but contrast might be lower. Otherwise iq is fine. The main problem with that lens is it focuses really slowly. Missed a ton of action shots. The STM version could be a lot faster. Anyway not a concern if your subjects don't move.

The lens is certainly super light and relatively small.

Xyclopx wrote in post #17054760
I used the older 55-250 without STM on my 7d. Iq was good. Not sure if it was my imagination but contrast might be lower. Otherwise iq is fine. The main problem with that lens is it focuses really slowly. Missed a ton of action shots. The STM version could be a lot faster. Anyway not a concern if your subjects don't move.

The lens is certainly super light and relatively small.

I have 3 L lens currently and know L lens normally have more contrast and colour rendering.
I will not buy micro-motor lens, had bad experience with 18-55 II and 50 f1.4, but so far very happy with stm in my 40mm, although usm is better.