Canon RF-S 55-210mm f/5-7.1 IS STM

A new handy little telephoto zoom lens for Canon's APS-C RF mount mirrorless cameras.

This lens will /not/ work on digital SLR cameras, or Canon EOS M cameras - only Canon EOS R system cameras, and it only gives a smaller, APS-C image circle.

All sample pictures taken by me on a Canon EOS R7 camera.

Find it here (Amazon affiliate link - I earn a commission on purchases. Be sure to buy the right lens for your system):

...or on YouTube Memberships:

Equipment I use to make my videos (Amazon affiliate link - I earn a commission on purchases):

As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.

Music:
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License

[Hornwiesel]

Chris Frost... the man, the myth, the legend

[okaro]

Strange how it is 1/3 f-stop slower than the EF-M 55-200 mm. The minimum focus distance is a plus. The EF-M has one meter and that has been sometimes a problem.

[larvenfritson]

I know Canon just make these lenses to get people into the R-system and to feel the need for more expensive lenses, but I can't help but wonder how many new photographers have had all their enthusiasm sucked right out of them starting out with this gear like this.

[chacmool]

I'm waiting for the Mark II version with the f/7.1-9 aperture.😢

[ilyasovich]

Great review as usual, a comparaison with the 55-250 IS STM will be very interesting

[rodmehta]

I was hoping for a more compact 90-135mm, f11-22. In pink.

[malekith]

I really don't understand why canon makes lenses for APS-C with darker aperture than other brand ( or even their EF-S and EF-M version ), i mean... it's already a brand that suffer in low light because of their smaller APS-C and they somehow choose to make darker lenses to have even more difficulty in low light ( or to get faster shutter speed )... are they trying to kill their APS-C line ?

[chiliman]

Your videos are a joy to watch, always. I will say that Canon's rf-s offerings do nothing to make me regret trading in my R7 for a R8.

[dima]

Canon's obsession with compactness goes beyond all limits. Are lenses like 55-200 4-5.6 unacceptably large for an amateur ? Or did they do it this way to make 70-200 4 for $1600 seem more reasonable?

[Jawad.]

There are a few reasons why your reviews are the best on the internet, and I often resort to your channel to know the optical qualities of a lens.
1. They are highly scientific, and almost all the reviews since last 3 years (and may be beyond) are highly comparable.
2. You have set a standard of 42 MP to 45MP resolution for testing Canon, Nikon, and Sony Lenses. (Plus Sigma, Tamron, Laowa and other 3rd party lenses on Sony FF/Nikon APSC). You don't use Sony's 61 MP camera to keep the playing field level.

Request: Please introduce a rating system, like a likert scale, from 1-10.
For Example:
Lens: Canon RF-S 55-210mm f/5-7.1 IS STM
Sharpness: 5.5/10
Bokeh 4/10
Focus Breathing: Low
Stabilization: 7/10
Build quality: 6/10
Value: 5.5/10
"Recomended"

[swistedfilms]

This is the sort of lens that gets the job done when you're a tourist in Disneyland and got a camera at Costco or Target as a step up from your camera phone.

[airtyme]

That lens looks like a toy from a happy meal!

[michaelflinn]

I'm amazed by mine on the R50. Pretty happy and was great on safari in Africa

[bucharestbiketraffic]

I seen brighter basements than this lenses’ aperture.

[diegoasalinas]

Great review, as always Christopher, but this is a bit of a rant for cannon.

Perhaps a question for cannon but why does it seem that all the mirrorless Lenses that are not L quality are a stop or a stop or two darker than what they used to be on the EF and EF-S mount now even M mount, with no explanation for it. Doesn't seem to be the case with any other mirrorless brand. Seems like they are trying really hard for people not to want these lenses. While keeping their customers limited by excluding third-party lenses.

If they are going to just recycle m mount lens specs to rfs, what is taking so long to make these toy quality looking lens?

[maortheyoungcameraguy]

F7.1 on APS-C that is so disappointing

[CrashPCcz]

Christopher, you do awesome reviews, but this time, I really cannot give it to Canon. These lenses are not smaller, lighter or cheaper than EF-M 55-200mm. Yes it is 10mm longer, but it is also darker. Canon is either milking it or drops the cripple hammer. This one is halfway both. Soo, that´s that. Sad to see all that happening. Count me on support side soon though. Much appreciated!

[joliver]

Please compare it to Canon EFS 55-250mm IS STM.

[simontrezise]

It's really good to have you still with us. Long may you remain! And a very helpful first look at what looks like a superb camera.

[marka]

Excellent review. I just bought the R50, need this lens now. thank you.