Review on Get Crystal Clear Zoom with Canon's EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS II Telephoto Lens by Krisha Codm ᠌

I took a 17-85 kit to replace it, which I did not have enough focus length. It's a bit unusual that the focus ring is on the front end of the lens. But this does not really interfere, because manual focusing has to be used infrequently. Autofocus misses quite often, but works very quickly. It seemed to me that he misses precisely because of the response speed. The picture is more colorful than on the whale, but without processing the result will be boring. Slightly soapy, but within acceptable limits. The stub almost completely extinguishes the stir. Pretty decent glass for the price. Photos will definitely have to be finished in graphic editors if you want to get a good result. Verdict. I recommend it to amateurs with knowledge of photography theory and skills in working with graphic editors. If finances allow, it is better to take an Elka 70-200 for 23 kilo (without a stub, but the picture quality is better). It is better for teapots to take a soap dish and shoot on the machine. I am writing after a couple of months after the purchase. Its sharpness is not much inferior to Elka. Finishing in Photoshop practically does not require, contrary to my first assumptions. The maximum sharpness on the hole gives from 7 to 11. When shooting street portraits, it beautifully highlights the subject. I'm still worried about the plastic mount. Recently I slipped on the ice and fell along with the camera - I was lucky, I didn’t break it, I came to the conclusion that it’s better to shoot the lens when there is a chance of damaging it. But I do not consider this a significant drawback, you just need to observe elementary precautions and not take risks once again. In a word, I didn’t make a mistake in choosing a lens, so I raise my rating from 4 to 5