| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
|
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
  | sent on 02 Giugno 2020 Pros: Good sharpness at a fairly low price and weight. Cons: Lens that rotates with focus (no cpl), not very fast focus, plastic bayonet, only for APS-C Opinion: Used socket lens, paid for less than 100 coffees with attached warranty. I needed to complete my optical park for APS-C with a canvas, which would more or less meet two requirements: IS and low price. Found the offer I was talking about at the beginning, I decided, although honestly some doubt I had: I read a little everywhere of a chasm that should exist between this lens and its next version, the STM. I say that I have never touched the latter, but the IS II version has absolutely astounded me in terms of sharpness at all focal lengths. I was more or less expecting a continuation of my lens kit (just the 18-55 IS II), in terms of quality, and instead just not. Even at 250mm you can bring home more than good results, even at full size (which is 5.6 anyway). Of course, it suffers from all the cons that I have listed, which are basically the main ones that I have identified after using it 3 or 4 times (I refer to the slow maf), but in my way of seeing the pros weigh absolutely more. I recommend absolutely for amateur use (which is more or less what I do), not suitable for birds or to resume very dynamic subjects. |
  | sent on 20 Novembre 2017 Pros: Price, sharpness on almost any focal range, IS Cons: Maf sometimes slow and hesitant Opinion: I bought this lens after 4 years of photographing, just to cover the hole I had left after selling a 70-300 for a 400mm. I was thinking of buying it (naturally used) just for those few cases where I found some animal too close to using the 400mm, but I am very amused to use it even in the city or some landscape. The sharpness is really good and the chromatic yield is satisfactory. For what it costs, I think you can not really ask for more. With little light, the mafia is not performing well, but I mean, we're talking about a used item that's less than $ 200, so it's more than good. Recommended to everyone! |
 | sent on 08 Marzo 2017 Pros: zoom range, sharpness, the presence of the SI Cons: construction materials Opinion: I could define a small sample of sharpness, and I use the word 'small' is no coincidence. Had years ago with my old 600D and 'been a loyal copagno small dimensions which surprised me for the absolute clarity of files that could give me. I would recommend it highly to anyone who wants to cheaply get closer to the world of paintings. It 'been a goal that has met me at the time and today, when dealing with the files of the time, I'm always pleasantly surprised at the detail of the photo! Recommended! |
 | sent on 01 Marzo 2017 Pros: sharpness, escursionefocale, stabilizer Cons: maf slow, bayonet plastic, hood not available, sharpness than 200mm Opinion: was the second lens in my kit APSC and, after a slow change, the last lens APSC remained in my corredo.rnsin immediately amazed me for clarity even at room temperature, but sharpness is lost over the 200mm.rnla maf it is good with light and when using cross-type points, but goes to hell in the dark and if you do not use points of maf cross: the lens begins to focus when focus agganciare.rnpeccato without the lens hood is not supplied, but you know , canon them "offers" only to series L.rnrnper the rest this is a lens to buy absolutely, perhaps in STM version, because even if it is little used, leave you amazed at the quality of the file that regala.rn |
 | sent on 27 Febbraio 2016 Pros: Good sharpness, stabilizer and price. Cons: Af slow, material a bit 'poor. Opinion: The 55-250 IS II I bought it originally for my EOS 30D, is really a good lens for those who are beginners and want to get as close as possible to the subject. Of 30D and 60D has a good sharpness, I ran a series of shots of insects also getting good results (the lens of closing one or two stops well enough). A 250mm loses a bit 'of sharpness but I find it always acceptable yield. The lens has really given me great satisfaction, even if sometimes the autofocus is slow in some cases but on the opposite stabilizer works really well, to 250mm are made of the excellent handheld shooting hassle free! The construction is made of plastic, of course for 160 € spent you could not ask for more, maybe at least the bayonet metal. |
 | sent on 16 Aprile 2015 Pros: light, crisp, stabilization, excellent quality / price ratio Cons: front lens rotation, over 200 quality, af slow and sometimes insecure Opinion: I got it used and immediately I was amazed by the lightness and the quality of the images. Cala a hair over 200mm wide open but closing recovers a bit '. I'm no expert but it seems to me that its better to be between 70 and 150 mm. I was hesitant to buy it and now I think all in all I could also take it before. Great start by spending an amount contained with results more than good. |
 | sent on 25 Gennaio 2015 Pros: Focal range, stabilizer wonderful, excellent overall quality for its price, handyman, price. Cons: quality decrease to 250mm, Af slow in certain conditions. Opinion: My first (telephoto) lens. It gave me great satisfaction! only paid € 140 is a must have for anyone who wants to have a second objective basis and want to learn without spending a capitale.rnOttimo to learn a little 'everything from photos of sports, portraits, birds, landscapes, macro.rnIo I loved to macro photography using tubes prolunga.rnLo stabilizer is meraviglioso.rnL 'AF is a bit' slow, but it is a lens base.rnPer its price worth averlo.rnPer those looking for a lens and want to learn a little money goes just fine. |
 | sent on 24 Novembre 2014 Pros: Maximum aperture f 5/6 wide and good optical quality Cons: Not suitable for landscape photos Opinion: Good ..escursione focal smaller and the maximum aperture at the telephoto position, the upper one-third stop than other superzoom 56 instead of 6/3 also good stabilizer ... not supplied lens hood, it has not found a problem since for a few Euros suitable for those in the 18/55 and as a continuation of the great focal pure price |
 | sent on 15 Settembre 2014 Pros: Price, sufficient sharpness and lightness. Cons: Construction plasticky, not USM, focusing in low light situations. Opinion: Good canvas to start with, but improvable contrasts and the engine af.rnAberrazioni present (are corrected in pp) .rnOvviamente gains in sharpness closing "a little" .rnScarso photo sports, nature etc. .. if you are interested to take a tamron 70 -300 ultrasonic (of course the price goes up) .rnBuono for landscapes. Change it when you take a 70-200 L. Useless routes through other homes (eg. Tamron, sigma) .rnrn |
 | sent on 22 Febbraio 2014 Pros: Price, decent sharpness, very low weight, stabilizzatore.rnrn Cons: Finishing, plastic (but greatly reduces the weight), no hood, autofocus sometimes difficoltoso.rn Opinion: Opinion: Using quest'obbiettivo for about a year, it's my first telephoto lens and I must say that I was very satisfied for the needs I had. With a low price photo shots rather sharp and well colored. Only at maximum zoom you notice any weak point, but yes is the minutiae for the object of which it speaks. For people who are new to the world of photography I recommend it because it really opens up a world! |
 | sent on 23 Agosto 2013 Pros: Price, weight, focal length, stabilization Cons: Over long focal lose, AF not fast nor silent, missing lens hood (sold separately), and suffers the contrasts in these cases suffer from a bit of chromatic aberration. Opinion: Great lens to start, inexpensive and lightweight, perfect to carry around trips thanks to its light weight and compact size. If we look at the quality / price ratio, I think it is unattainable: a cost around 200 Euros difficult to get a lens so crisp and even stabilized. In time, however, when you try to take pictures a bit more "challenging" (sports, wildlife, etc.), shows its limitations, in the sense that if you try a crop ... pushed the boundaries a bit lost, but still a good buy to get started. |
 | sent on 13 Giugno 2013 Pros: Weight and overall dimensions, price stabilization Cons: "Only" 250 mm, TA quality, brightness Opinion: It 'a good canvas, although the 250 mm often proved too few, but it is a perspective that allows you anyway Traveling to light and have a decent length. The shots are not bad at TA but closing at f / 8 earn much. L 'AF speed and accuracy is good (considering it is not a USM) and the IS from a hand if you do not have too firm a hand. |
 | sent on 25 Marzo 2013 Pros: Price-size-stabilizer-very precise auto focus-zoom-to-weight materials for a good price like this Cons: I have not found no cons Opinion: Bell precise objective, the first time I used a picture of a race horse and the pictures came very well, thanks to the fast and precise focusing! Having a 18-55 the materials of 55-250 are excellent, as the former is its plasticky! RnNiente to say, and that is a great lens ... would recommend it to anyone who wants to buy a cheap lens! |
 | sent on 03 Gennaio 2013 Pros: Ratio quality / price, size, range of focal lengths, weight, bokeh. Cons: Hood, af a bit 'slow in low light, in relation to any price. Opinion: Well, everything is good or bad if it relates to its cost. According to this rule in question is the optical incriticabile. With 190-200 € (€ 130-140 new or used) you bring home a zoom from discrete optical quality and construction, lightweight and compatto.rnAnche when you exit where you do not plan to use a cloth, keep it in the bag is so undemanding that "it is worth." rnrnSe then compared to the various economic 70/75-300 you see around, all doubt disappears because this perspective makes his home in very good figura.rnrnOvviamente canon the 70-200 is a must with characteristics far superior but much more cumbersome and expensive .. Overall I would recommend this lens rnrnNel to all holders of asp-c. The inexperienced because they can experience at a very attractive price, producing, however, beautiful scatti.rnA who is experienced but often uses this range of focal lengths, would recommend to complete the outfit for an occasional use. rnPer who does wildlife photography can be a'Excellent back-up unit or to use in difficult conditions where the bulky and expensive biancone is less adatto.rnrnP.s. The lens hood sucks. |
 | sent on 28 Settembre 2012 Pros: Quality / price ratio, overall performance at all focal lengths. Good bokeh and beautiful portraits. Stabilization. Cons: Given the price and the focal range I would say no. Opinion: Obviously, if you pick a lens from 400-600 euro up is no difference constructive but to have substantial upgrade in terms of image quality you have to climb quite a price. Sometimes sfocheggia, especially in low light conditions ... but it costs 200 euro, covering 200mm and you can not get a very good cut. Alternative in terms of its objectives "cheap" is the Tamron 70-300 VC 4-5.6 (than however it costs more), the rest to 200 euro there is nothing so good for Canon. The construction is kit lens but it is still valid, unless you smash it on a rock not to be broken by using it :) |
 | sent on 31 Agosto 2012 Pros: Value for money, stabilizer, and focal length. Cons: Materials, Over 200mm loses a lot of sharpness. Opinion: And 'perspective inexpensive because it is usm, its lenses are not bad for what they cost. E 'equipped with an excellent stabilizer, and covers a good range of focal lengths, the AF is not fast but accurate it gets along with little light should be in trouble. Over 200mm loses much in clarity, it should be at least close to F8. One lens that I recommend to us a budget, when combined with the classic 18-55 provided in almost every kit allows you to have a good equipment at a reasonable price, if you want you do brisk business on second. |
 | sent on 23 Agosto 2012 Pros: weight, stabilizer, focal length Cons: sometimes hard to focus in AF Opinion: Purchased in May to join him to 18-55 of the same series that comes with the 60D to cover quite a range of focal length without spending big money on a tripod or freehand, with or without live view, dall'insetto the moon, better grounded Manual focus is giving me a lot of satisfaction. Joined in May in Juzaphoto, with 39 photographs published, four are among the examples of photos taken using this perspective, and appreciated by some users, so I recommend it to those who are approaching to photography and / or (still) does not want to spend too much money. For now I have not had the desired amount required to use the lens hood is not supplied. Good "work"! |
 | sent on 19 Giugno 2012 Pros: Quality / Price - usability is light and unbalances the little body - good for portraits at 70mm a good bokeh and blur pleasant - closup good, too bad the minimum distance is too high. Cons: Motor too slow in sporting occasions and birds - for a hundred euro more the Tammy 70-300 has the Ultrasonic Motor and 45mm more, even if the focus is more raw and less pleasant - maximum aperture too high, it would have been better at least to 2.8-3.5 to 55mm for best blurred. Opinion: I bought this lens on the advice of a friend who owned it. It is an amateur photographer and there has always found good. Using it in AF of birds and insects is too slow, you can not focus on them. In manual mode, of course, well behaved, in practice the focus makes clear photos, but not razor sharp: croppando 100% sharpness is not as pretty. The contrast and the color does not convince me always, with a good light works well. I recommend it to those who have a low budget, although other objectives would estimate used. |
 | sent on 08 Maggio 2012 Pros: price, weight, good zoom, stabilizer Cons: Low-contrast colors, minimal equipment Opinion: As a student my budget was limited: D I decided to fall back on a telephoto lens of middle rank, and I must say I was pleasantly surprised. for now I have always been satisfied and I never expected such a lens for only 200 €! ok, the AF is noisy, the lens extends far forward and this can often be uncomfortable and the focus ring is not very accurate, but it has other positive qualities that far outweigh the cons! AF is really fast, and some shooting sports was amazing, in my view, zoom up to 250 mm is remarkable and very versatile, and the stabilizer does a great job. I tried lenses like the 70-200 f4 IS and the comparison is totally unfair, but then again, to be a poor lens from 200 € (because if we talk about camera equipment, EUR 200 trifle!) Is superb! I still do not fathom the fact that canon does not provide the lens hood and case (supplied only for the L series, I think ...) but ok, with a few euro if they can find on the internet ... the only obvious flaw of this lens is the color rendering, unfortunately you can not ask for everything! I have to say that in any case, with a minimum post production, the results are more than excellent! |
 | sent on 03 Maggio 2012 Pros: Price, Weight, Range of Focal AF and stabilizer ... Cons: Hood not included Opinion: A great all-round! I just bought it because I wanted to cover a zoom from 50 to 200 ... I paid very little and I use it a lot. AF fast and accurate. If you do not I would miss it! I was surprised by the quality of shots and AF speed. If you do not want to spend much and are looking for a good zoom recommend it! The only drawback is the hood, but the detail is a great do everything to bring it with them because if you remove a weight that you did not notice! Good light! |
 | sent on 14 Ottobre 2011 Pros: hike, price, size, stabilizer, weight Cons: materials, sharpness. equipment Opinion: this lens, specifically designed for aps-c, has a wide range that allows you to capture details even very distant. is economical, small in size with a stabilizer is very effective. images, although still good, but they are not very sharp, the colors a bit 'washed out and lacking contrast. is made entirely of plastic, but if, like me, you rarely use one telephoto zoom but you can not give to have one is the best choice. If you plan to use it often then it is better to buy telephoto Best (and dear ones at least twice ...), but be aware that there is more light and compact telephoto lens that. between the version II and I the only differences are some particular external appearance and nothing more. missing hood and housing. |
 | sent on 27 Settembre 2011 Pros: Price, range of focal lengths and weight Cons: quality shots TA hood and ugly and uncomfortable Opinion: If you do not use very often telephoto focal lengths but I do an occasional use, then this lens is for you. I always carry as it is extremely light, I bought it used, with hood, still under warranty at a price of € 160. And 'ideal for shots with good light because the best results are obtained closing at 6.3 to 7.1 even if the stabilizer works very well. At full aperture, however, is not so bad ... Last note the hood, which is part and expensive: it is really plasticky, delicate and cumbersome to put on and take off. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
