hardserve on eBay

17 Mar, 2010

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM - An Excellent Lens

I am now the third owner of my copy, and it doesn't seem to be any worse for wear for it. But then again most camera buffs take pretty good care of their equipment. My copy, perhaps just lucky me, also does not seem to exhibit the dreaded dust sucking problem that it has been reputed to have. I see no dust specks under the front element. I upgraded to this from the 17-85mm IS f4-5.6, which is a nice lens in its own right. I am glad I did for a number of reasons: - its constant f2.8 is great for low light and bokeh - my 40D body shifts its center cross-type autofocus point to a higher accuracy mode with f2.8 (or faster) lenses - it's sharp wide open, and is razor sharp at f4 - images taken with it have more "pop" (i.e. contrast and colour) compared to the 17-85mm, which is typical of L glass - its barrel distortion at 17mm is significantly better than the 17-85mm (of course you can use DPP in post processing to further reduce) - it can directly share the 77mm C-PL, ND4, and ND8 filters I already have - it feels a bit sturdier than 17-85mm did - it maintains it's value very well, and the demand is high for it in the secondary market So it's all good, but there are some (minor) niggles: - it maintains it's value very well, which means I paid a lot for it which I wouldn't mind so much if ... - ... and it's the same old complaint: for that kind of money you don't get either the L build or a hood (although admittedly I was lucky the additional EW-83J hood was included in my purchase from the previous owner) - it is big in comparison to the 17-85mm, but it is well balanced on my 40D - I mourn the loss of the 30mm of extra reach the 17-85mm had (but I have a 85mm f1.8 and a 70-200mm f2.8 in my kit to take care of that) In summary the lens is great as a walkaround or for indoors, and you won't be disappointed if you get it. It's considered by many, including myself, to be the best single Canon EF-S lens to date for IQ. I had briefly considered the 24-105mm f4L instead, but felt that not having the wide end was a show stopper for my walkaround needs even though I also own a 10-22mm. The 24-105mm is a perfect range on a FF body though. Some would advise against buying this lens, or any other EF-S for that matter, because if you ever upgrade to FF you will need to ditch it. That is true, but if that time comes for you, you will have a lineup of buyers ready to take it off your hands without you losing very much from what you paid for it. Canon's 1.6x crop lineup is going to be around for a very long time.

3 of 3 found this helpful

17 Mar, 2010

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM - An Excellent Lens

I am now the third owner of my copy, and it doesn't seem to be any worse for wear for it. But then again most camera buffs take pretty good care of their equipment. My copy, perhaps just lucky me, also does not seem to exhibit the dreaded dust sucking problem that it has been reputed to have. I see no dust specks under the front element. I upgraded to this from the 17-85mm IS f4-5.6, which is a nice lens in its own right. I am glad I did for a number of reasons: - its constant f2.8 is great for low light and bokeh - my 40D body shifts its center cross-type autofocus point to a higher accuracy mode with f2.8 (or faster) lenses - it's sharp wide open, and is razor sharp at f4 - images taken with it have more "pop" (i.e. contrast and colour) compared to the 17-85mm, which is typical of L glass - its barrel distortion at 17mm is significantly better than the 17-85mm (of course you can use DPP in post processing to further reduce) - it can directly share the 77mm C-PL, ND4, and ND8 filters I already have - it feels a bit sturdier than 17-85mm did - it maintains it's value very well, and the demand is high for it in the secondary market So it's all good, but there are some (minor) niggles: - it maintains it's value very well, which means I paid a lot for it which I wouldn't mind so much if ... - ... and it's the same old complaint: for that kind of money you don't get either the L build or a hood (although admittedly I was lucky the additional EW-83J hood was included in my purchase from the previous owner) - it is big in comparison to the 17-85mm, but it is well balanced on my 40D - I mourn the loss of the 30mm of extra reach the 17-85mm had (but I have a 85mm f1.8 and a 70-200mm f2.8 in my kit to take care of that) In summary the lens is great as a walkaround or for indoors, and you won't be disappointed if you get it. It's considered by many, including myself, to be the best single Canon EF-S lens to date for IQ. I had briefly considered the 24-105mm f4L instead, but felt that not having the wide end was a show stopper for my walkaround needs even though I also own a 10-22mm. The 24-105mm is a perfect range on a FF body though. Some would advise against buying this lens, or any other EF-S for that matter, because if you ever upgrade to FF you will need to ditch it. That is true, but if that time comes for you, you will have a lineup of buyers ready to take it off your hands without you losing very much from what you paid for it. Canon's 1.6x crop lineup is going to be around for a very long time.

17 Mar, 2010

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM - An Excellent Lens

I am now the third owner of my copy, and it doesn't seem to be any worse for wear for it. But then again most camera buffs take pretty good care of their equipment. My copy, perhaps just lucky me, also does not seem to exhibit the dreaded dust sucking problem that it has been reputed to have. I see no dust specks under the front element. I upgraded to this from the 17-85mm IS f4-5.6, which is a nice lens in its own right. I am glad I did for a number of reasons: - its constant f2.8 is great for low light and bokeh - my 40D body shifts its center cross-type autofocus point to a higher accuracy mode with f2.8 (or faster) lenses - it's sharp wide open, and is razor sharp at f4 - images taken with it have more "pop" (i.e. contrast and colour) compared to the 17-85mm, which is typical of L glass - its barrel distortion at 17mm is significantly better than the 17-85mm (of course you can use DPP in post processing to further reduce) - it can directly share the 77mm C-PL, ND4, and ND8 filters I already have - it feels a bit sturdier than 17-85mm did - it maintains it's value very well, and the demand is high for it in the secondary market So it's all good, but there are some (minor) niggles: - it maintains it's value very well, which means I paid a lot for it which I wouldn't mind so much if ... - ... and it's the same old complaint: for that kind of money you don't get either the L build or a hood (although admittedly I was lucky the additional EW-83J hood was included in my purchase from the previous owner) - it is big in comparison to the 17-85mm, but it is well balanced on my 40D - I mourn the loss of the 30mm of extra reach the 17-85mm had (but I have a 85mm f1.8 and a 70-200mm f2.8 in my kit to take care of that) In summary the lens is great as a walkaround or for indoors, and you won't be disappointed if you get it. It's considered by many, including myself, to be the best single Canon EF-S lens to date for IQ. I had briefly considered the 24-105mm f4L instead, but felt that not having the wide end was a show stopper for my walkaround needs even though I also own a 10-22mm. The 24-105mm is a perfect range on a FF body though. Some would advise against buying this lens, or any other EF-S for that matter, because if you ever upgrade to FF you will need to ditch it. That is true, but if that time comes for you, you will have a lineup of buyers ready to take it off your hands without you losing very much from what you paid for it. Canon's 1.6x crop lineup is going to be around for a very long time.

7 of 7 found this helpful

Shop by category

hardserve

About

Feedback ratings

Last 12 months

All Feedback (263)