Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras
by Canon
|
List Price: Our Price: $1,049.00 You Save: $851.00 (45%) Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours Buy Used: from $890.00 (click here) Category: Digital Camera See more product details |
|---|
Customers in the UK,
Buy this product at amazon.co.uk
for British Pounds
Digital Cameras Photo Reviews of Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras
Customer Review: My rant
Summary: 5 Stars
Ok if you're like me, you've been reading review after review on this lens. And if you're like me, you're getting sick of reviews that point out the obvious faults with this lens, over and over again.
Here's one. "This lens is an EF-S and it only works with a 1.6 crop body wah-wah-wah!" OMG! If I didn't own a Rebel, 20D, 30D, or 40D, I wouldn't even be shopping around for this! "But if you upgrade to a full frame body this lens will be obsolete." Give me a friggin break. If I was going to drop serious coin to "upgrade" to a 5D, then obviously I've got enough dough to get it. Maybe I should save a little more and plan on getting lenses with it too. It's as if they think this lens has a resale value like a Kia. Why couldn't I decide to sell it along with the 40D if I was going to "upgrade" to a 5D?
Here's another. "B-B-But it's a $1000 and it doesn't feel as nice as an L lens." Tell me what L lens you can get that as a usable zoom of 17-55, that's this fast, and has an Image Stabilizer? Well let's see here.. there's the ever so popular 17-40 f/4L but it doesn't have an IS and it only zooms to 40. Even 55 is sorta on the short side. And it's not as fast with an aperture of 4. Next! Ah. The 24-70 f/2.8L There we go. This is WAY better than the 17-55. But wait, at it's widest it's 24mm which on a crop body is actually 38mm. If you're like me, you like to take landscape and group photos. 38mm? Come on! Not gonna cut it. Also, where's the IS?
Fact is. EF-S are a new breed of lenses designed specifically for 1.6x. L's are not designed for 1.6x cameras. And L's have been out a long time so you don't see a good walk around lens with IS. Maybe someday but not now. The closest L in this range is going to be the 24-105 f/4L IS but again it's not wide enough for a 1.6. It's friggin awesome for a full frame and if I ever get a 5D I'd probably get one of these as well. But I wouldn't even consider it on a crop body.
L's are great, fantastic lenses and they have the cool red ring around it that screams, "I'm a professional" but as you can see, they're not designed for 1.6 crop yet. And what professional uses a crop body as their main camera anyways? Right now, the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM is as good as they come.
BTW here's another. "The 17-55 is a dust magnet. It's a freaking vacuum cleaner!" Ok.. so Canon spent their $1000 on the glass, IS and plastic. Maybe if they used magnesium and weather sealed it you'd be a happy camper. But would you be happy spending $700 more? How about just $500 more? Maybe. Maybe not because for some people like me, we can live with a lighter lens that needs to be babied a little more. How many people actually have photos with dust showing on them? I've never seen 'em. If so, maybe you should sell that lens and "upgrade".
In the past, people had to "upgrade" due to the lack of lens choices. And Canon knows this. They're not stoopid. They know that if the lens choices grow too much too fast for their "amateur" cameras, then their "professional" cameras won't sell. If you own a 30D or a 40D you know that the body is capable of making you money. Shoot.. even a Rebel XTi is pretty darn amazing. I don't expect Canon to create an L lens for the 1.6x because of their marketing strategy. If they made a fast, ultra-wide zoom w/IS in their L lens.. people will just stop buying 5D's imho. Thanx for reading. Carry on.
Customer Review: Is It Worth It?
Summary: 5 Stars
I'm a photojournalistic hobbyist and I was reluctant to buy this lens at first due to the hefty price tag and novice stature I had in photography. After begging my wife to make a super-mega birthday/christmas/all-year gift of this lens I finally got it about a year and a half ago from Amazon (Oct 2008). I do not regret it. The images it captures are among the best I get and the range of the lens makes it the highest use lens I have. Given how much I rely on this lens, I can't imagine not having it. I considered getting the Canon 24-70 f2.8L, but since I have a crop-sensored body (Canon 40D) the range (38-112mm equivalent) wasn't what I was looking for. The L lens also lacked Image Stabilization.
Pros:
- excellent image quality
- useful range (on my camera 70% of time)
- very good low-light capabilities
- fast, silent AF system
- image stabilizer works well
Cons:
- heavy
- pricey
About the only negative I read about the lens was that people called it a "dust magnet." After having the lens now for a year and a half I can only say that I have not experienced that. I can see how that can happen (with this lens and most other zoom lenses), but that has not happened to me. I use this lens a lot, and it spends most of the time on an open shelf, but I have not noticed any collection of dust inside the lens.
What drew me to this lens (and keeps me using it) is it's fantastic image quality and solid low-light performance. The images it captures are often on par with pictures I get from my prime lenses. But instead of describing them to you here's a link to our website:
peteandviv[dot]com/photography
The low-light capabilities are quite good. If the light is really tough (indoors & at night), I'm usually forced to grab my 50mm 1.8 or 85mm 1.8, but this lens does the job a majority of the time for me.
Also, now that I have the Canon 7D and am learning about film-making, I'm finding myself even more satisfied with this lens due to the image stabilization system. It doesn't magically fix all camera-shake, but it makes a difference on those subtle panning shots I take on a tripod or monopod.
Recommendations:
Pro - I don't know why you're even reading this review. You've got your 1D or 5D and the 24-70L (yes, I'm jealous).
Hobbyist - Get this lens if you just got your tax return or some other influx of cash. You could also try begging your husband or wife, but results may vary. If you don't have that kind of money you may want to consider the Sigma or the Tamron. They aren't quite equivalent due to differences in range (sigma) and lack of IS (tamron), but you probably won't notice the difference 90% of the time. I can't speak authoritatively on that one though because I haven't tried them.
Novice - Probably best to get started with the Canon Rebel, 18-55mm IS lens, 50mm 1.8, and 55-250 IS. It'll cost you under $1000 and you can take some ridiculously awesome pictures with that set. You could even grab all that off craigslist for under $700.
P.S. When I began in photography I just wanted to get started with a budget around $1500 or less and roll with it. Now my load of photographic equipment is up over $4000. It's like a crazy addiction!
Customer Review: So good I forgot the high price
Summary: 5 Stars
I purchased this lens three months ago to take the place of a Canon 17-85 IS USM f4.5-5.6. I am sure that many folks have purchased the 17-85 either as part of the enhanced kit for the 40d or as a natural seeming upgrade for the 18-55 Canon kit that comes with the Rebels. To make this review a bit more helpful, I am attempting to write an "applications based" review. That is, this is how I use my gear, this is what was wrong with my previous solution and finally this is how the lens in question met up with my expectations.
1. My kit: I carry a 40d body with a 70-200 f2.8L IS USM and the f2.8s 17-55 IS USM.
2. My usage: My main camera usage is to cover my daugher's fastpitch softball games and my son's color guard team competitions. Additionally, I am the designated family photographer, the product photographer at work, etc. My average number of exposures in a year is about 25,000.
3. What was wrong with my old 17-85 IS USM? The previous zoom was not awful. I certainly captures many fine shots with it, but I had to be careful in order to get them. It was not tolerant of being used fully open, at full wide angle or at full tele. At any extreme it would produce noticeably soft images. Not fuzzy, just soft. So, I would have to worry about it all the time. Also, since the low light performance of the 17-85 was poor, it meant that I just flat missed a lot of the shots at dusk or under the lights. I wanted my next low end zoom to be forgiving enough that I would not have to worry so much about how close I was to any of the end points of aperture and zoom range. I wanted it to be very sharp across the whole range of aperture and zoom. Lastly, I wanted to get rid of the issue of having the photos from my smaller zoom totally looking flat when compared to the shots from my 70-200 L. The 17-55 EFS IS USM took care of all of these issues for me. The sharpness is vastly improved across virtually all conditions. Also, since I shoot sports, the f2.8 aperture helps the autofocus work a lot faster and more accurately. Due to it's slow maximum aperture, the 17-85 would occassionally have focus issues in any low light or low contrast situation. The 17-55 clears all of this up.
The 17-55 f2.8 vs. my expectations: Overall, it's totally great! My hopes for sharpness, speed, etc. were all well met. The f2.8 is open enough to produce good portraiture with the background bokeh nice and smooth. Now, there are a lot of reviews that comment on dust penetration and the build quality relative to the L lens. I haven't had the dust issue yet, but I could see that as a potential issue since the apparent build is sturdy, but not like the L. Of course, the 70-200 L is a super sturdy metal monster machine and clearly is able to take abuse that the 17-55 cannot deal with. When you look at the rest of the Canon crop frame options in this range, however, there aren't any good options to deal with my issues of needing speed of focus and operation.
Summary: if you have a canon crop frame sensor SLR, you have to have this lens.
Customer Review: Wonderful lens - perfect for 30D
Summary: 5 Stars
I have had quite the struggle finding a high quality wide angle lens for my Canon 30D. If you look in the customer review section for the Canon 17-40 f/4L reviews, you'll find a lengthy review from me about how displeased I was with the quality of that lens (I went through 2 of them, and neither performed to a reasonable standard given the price of the lens). I then continued my research and after spending about 30 hours and two weeks of research, I decided to give the 17-55 a try.
I am very satisfied with this lens. It is not perfect, but after all the research that I've spent looking into DSLR lenses, I don't think any lens is perfect, you just have to find the lens that right for what you want to photograph. For me, my focus is on outdoor & landscape photography, and this lens performs extremely well for that application. The 17-55 is a fast lens at f/2.8, but I do find that it is not too sharp at this aperture. However, at f/8 to f/11, this lens is very sharp at center and sharp enough at the edges to yield high quality landscape pictures. The colors are rich and brilliant. There is a bit of a lens flare problem, but I do have a lens hood on order (cheap knock-off from an auction site...I'm not about to spend $50 from Canon on a piece of plastic!) and that should take care of the issue. The lens is super fast when focusing and very quiet. I have not had an issue with dust in the lens like some reviewers, but I've only had the lens for a couple weeks, and I take great care in not exposing it to places where there could be dust issues.
Image Stabilization is an amazing thing. I have read reviews from people saying that it is not that valuable on a wide angle lens, however, I have found it quite useful on several occasions. Cloudy days, evenings and dusk when light levels are getting low, and indoors, the IS can easily mean the difference between a blurry shot and a sharp one. If you're shooting at 1/30 or 1/15 of a second, the IS will almost guarantee that you can get a sharp picture without camera shake. I have even been able to take pictures down to 1/3" and eliminate camera shake, which was impossible for me with a non-IS lens.
Like I said before, I do not find that using the f/2.8 aperture yields very sharp images, but I only use that speed when shooting indoors, and with those pictures, I'm not as concerned with images that would be suitable for framing at 16x20". 4x6" or 5x7" prints look excellent using f/2.8 which is good enough for my use. If this is your type of photography, then you should be aware of this issue.
Pros:
1. Excellent color, sharp images between f/8 - f/11
2. Well built, solid feel
3. Quick focus
4. Image stabilization
Cons:
1. Expensive (but you get what you pay for)
2. F/2.8 not very sharp, but good for everyday photography in low light
3. Lens flare (nothing that a hood can't correct though)
Customer Review: Best general-purpose lens for crop cameras
Summary: 5 Stars
After much research, I decided to get this lens with my first DSLR, and it didn't disappoint. It is quite possibly the best general-purpose lens you can get for a 1.6x crop factor camera (e.g. a 1000D, 500D, or 50D). You can trust that I'm not just saying this to justify such an investment after the fact (it is a bit pricey), because I bought another copy of this lens after someone stole my first one.
The combination of a very useful zoom range from wide-angle to medium telephoto, a large and constant maximum aperture of f/2.8, three-stop equivalent image stabilization, and great sharpness, make it worth the investment.
At around the 17mm end it performs very well at landscapes. It exhibits very low perspective distortion, so you don't get that obvious wide-angle look (unless you get really close to the subject, of course). The longer end, coupled with the large f/2.8 aperture can get you some good portraits photos. What makes this lens so versatile of course is that you can capture anything in between those two as well. Event photography, street photography, weddings, whatever. Indoor, the image stabilization and large aperture help a great deal.
The faults of this lens aren't major, but with a price tag this hefty, full disclosure is especially important. Here are the four main complaints I've heard about this lens:
1. It accumulates dust. Neither of my copies have done this. They are pretty much dust-free. I've read that this was an issue with some early copies of this lens and that Canon has addressed this, so you shouldn't worry about it.
2. The build quality doesn't match the price tag. This is true. It's not built as well as L lenses, some of which cost less than this one. I think it's good enough, though. The zoom ring is big and it turns smoothly. It has a distance indicator and a good focus ring. The IS on/off and Manual Focus switches are well placed and shaped so you don't flip them by accident. I certainly can't complain.
3. It flares more easily than some lenses. This is also true, though the hood helps prevent this. I rarely get flare unless I have a huge light source (such as the sun) in the frame.
4. The hood (Canon EW-83J Lens Hood for EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens) isn't included. People probably wouldn't complain so much about this if Canon didn't charge so much for it (though Amazon's price isn't too bad at the moment). You should definitely get it though, as it prevents flaring and also protects the front element in case you bump the camera into something. You can get cheaper replica hoods on eBay and elsewhere, though I've heard some of those don't fit as well. I just bought a used Canon hood.