PDA

View Full Version : Ef-s 17-55 Is 2.8?




bluewire
May 15, 2007, 11:04 AM
anyone with one of these beasts? I tried a search to get some opinions but couldn't find any...I figure someone here has got one of these and might have an opinion to share on its quality...

:)



Lord Fluff
May 15, 2007, 11:14 AM
Head on over to Fred Miranda where you'll find plenty of info - it's a very highly thought-of lens

Grimace
May 15, 2007, 11:20 AM
I had it on my 30D. It's a fantastic lens, sharp as any L glass I've had.

The downside is that it's EF-S. If you're spending that kind of money on a lens...maybe (just maybe!) you should look at a 5D too. If you do decide to move to full frame, all those EF-S lenses are useless!

djbahdow01
May 15, 2007, 12:21 PM
anyone with one of these beasts? I tried a search to get some opinions but couldn't find any...I figure someone here has got one of these and might have an opinion to share on its quality...

:)


Another good place to look is dpreview.com. Check out the Pro Forum as well as the Canon forums.

ThomasJefferson
May 15, 2007, 12:41 PM
I have one and it lives on my 30D.
Sharper than all my old ef primes in the same range.
IS is excellent on this lens.
Would buy it again in a second ....

ThomasJefferson
May 15, 2007, 12:42 PM
As a former prime shooter, it is a bit big and heavy compared to what I was used to ...

Grimace
May 15, 2007, 03:01 PM
It definitely is a beast, but it's probably one of the best non-prime lens that Canon has ever made. Now that I remember more about it, all of the elements are the same as L glass; Canon doesn't label it as such because it is an EF-S lens (stupid marketing...)

wmmk
May 15, 2007, 06:07 PM
anyone with one of these beasts? I tried a search to get some opinions but couldn't find any...I figure someone here has got one of these and might have an opinion to share on its quality...

:)

It's called L killer for a reason. The only Canon zooms that end up with traditional 24-70mm equivalent field of view range on a DSLR are the 18-55, 17-40, and 17-55. This is the fastest, the only one with IS, but also unfortunately the most expensive.

If you have the money and aren't interested in FF, go for the 17-55.

Glen Quagmire
May 19, 2007, 01:19 PM
It's awesome. Bit large and heavy, though, especially with the lens hood on it.

islandman
May 22, 2007, 05:33 AM
It's by far my favorite lens. It lives on my 30D all the time. http://www.fredmiranda.com is where I did my research before buying it.

walangij
May 24, 2007, 02:29 AM
I hear that it's IQ of the 17-55 IS is similar to the much cheaper Tamron 17-50mm which goes for around $450 or half the price of the 17-55 IS.

If IS really means that much to you I'd go for the Canon, but otherwise the Tamron is fine, I have one and it's IQ is superb but I'm finding out that IS really would be more of a benefit for the shooting I do (inside and low light) so I'll upgrade in the near future.

Even if you plan on full frame in the future, the 17-55 will hold it's value so don't be too worried if you purchase it now and want to purchase a FF camera and lens later, someone will buy the 17-55 if it is well kept in the future, these days it goes used for around $850-900 compared to the retail price of 949.