17-55mm

canon400d · April 11, 2009

Yeah, I have finally gone for the Canon 17-55mm 2.8 I needed a fast lens, but can anyone, well Ziggy you made my mind up with this lens. I know it is costly and I have gone for the top of the range filter etc and hood and the lens will be arriving in a couple of days. Is there any advice you or anyone else can give me using this lens. I use a 40D and always shoot raw? Is it a walk around lens or should I still use my 17-85mm IS lens I got with my 40D?
I really would like to know when I should be using this lens as against the 17-85 lens.
Regards
Bob

Toshido · April 11, 2009

Just a guess since I have neither of those lenses. But my guess is you will barely touch the 17-85 anymore. Only time you will grab that lens is when you need the extra little reach and can't take a couple steps forward.

Enjoy the lens I am still trying to convince the wife to let me get one

Candid Arts · April 11, 2009

Yeah. Sell the 17-85. Won't use it. The 17-55 is great for low light situations. Any time you need some extra light, yet don't need a lot of zoom. It's good for a walk around, just can't zoom a bunch of you need it. A GREAT walk around lens is the 24-105 f4L, it just likes light.

I don't have this lens yet, but it is next on my list as soon as the bank account allows. Congrats on the purchase, can't wait to see some results.

Moogle Pepper · April 12, 2009

I third the selling of the 17-85. You are not going to miss that extra range, when you are going to be severely cut up from the 17-55's sharpness!

Scott_Quier · April 12, 2009

For walking around, your new 17-55 and your 70-200 are all you are going to need. I looked in your profile, and I see you also have the 50-255 and the 70-300 and am worndering way you're haning onto those lenses. Do you touch them any more? If not, sell them maybe?

ziggy53 · April 12, 2009

Congratulations Bob on the new lens. The Canon EF-S 17-55mm, f/2.8 IS USM is an excellent standard zoom and mostly stays on my Canon 40D body. It's a good/great choice for general purpose photography as well as events, some portraiture and some landscapes. As Scott said, coupled with the EF 70-200mm f4L that combination is just about perfect for most anything and with your EF-S 10-22mm super-wide zoom and macro lens there is very little you cannot do.

canon400d · April 12, 2009

ziggy53 wrote:

Congratulations Bob on the new lens. The Canon EF-S 17-55mm, f/2.8 IS USM is an excellent standard zoom and mostly stays on my Canon 40D body. It's a good/great choice for general purpose photography as well as events, some portraiture and some landscapes. As Scott said, coupled with the EF 70-200mm f4L that combination is just about perfect for most anything and with your EF-S 10-22mm super-wide zoom and macro lens there is very little you cannot do.

Thanks Ziggy and everyone else for the advice and remarks which I truly appreciate. I just cannot wait for that lens to arrive.
With regards to my other lenses ie: 18-55mm basic which I got with my 400D and also the Sigma 70-300 I never use. Since I got the Canon 50-255 IS which was a cheap lens.I have never used the 70-200L F.4 lens as it doesn't have IS.
I have only used these three lenses only a few times. I am up for selling them but I never realised at the time I did'nt keep the boxes. I don't know how to sell them and I must admit they are just never used.
However, from what you say the 17-85mm lens will have to go too and I have found it to be an excellent lens which I got with the 40D.
There is no doubt about it if you buy a camera the lens comes really cheap I see the 50D has the 24-105 but there just has to be a stopping point. I love the 40D. I must admit I get easily carried away in my old age.
As I say I just can't wait for the 17-55 and thanks once again for all your kind remarks which I truly appreciate.
Regards
Bob

Robinivich · April 12, 2009

I'm pretty pleased with the 10-22, 17-55, and 70-200f4 on my 40D, the 17-85 and sigma 70-300 are pretty much retired at this point, as is my XT.

I did however find a nice use for my XT and 17-85, travel. It's a smaller, handier setup, and would not break my heart to lose if something bad happened. At this point the resale value vs convenience of having them around is pretty much a tossup, and I'm glad to have them around.

canon400d · April 12, 2009

Robinivich wrote:

I'm pretty pleased with the 10-22, 17-55, and 70-200f4 on my 40D, the 17-85 and sigma 70-300 are pretty much retired at this point, as is my XT.

I did however find a nice use for my XT and 17-85, travel. It's a smaller, handier setup, and would not break my heart to lose if something bad happened. At this point the resale value vs convenience of having them around is pretty much a tossup, and I'm glad to have them around.

I could not agree more Robin. First of all I love my 40D and the 10-22. My 70-200 L F.4 is something I am gonna have to get used with as it hasn't IS. Can you give me some advice on this lens as I have had it for a while but could not get used to it and the reason I recently bought the Canon 55-250 IS lens. I think maybe increasing the shutter speed on the 70-200 would make a difference, but any help would be more than appreciated. I must say the Canon 55-250 is one good lens for its price. I bought it for £200 and the 70-200 I paid £700 and it doesn't have IS.
Going back to what you said the second hand price for my 400D and 17-85 although never hardly used is disgusting so you are so right in what you say.
Regards
Bob

Robinivich · April 13, 2009

canon400d wrote:

I could not agree more Robin. First of all I love my 40D and the 10-22. My 70-200 L F.4 is something I am gonna have to get used with as it hasn't IS. Can you give me some advice on this lens as I have had it for a while but could not get used to it and the reason I recently bought the Canon 55-250 IS lens. I think maybe increasing the shutter speed on the 70-200 would make a difference, but any help would be more than appreciated. I must say the Canon 55-250 is one good lens for its price. I bought it for £200 and the 70-200 I paid £700 and it doesn't have IS.
Going back to what you said the second hand price for my 400D and 17-85 although never hardly used is disgusting so you are so right in what you say.
Regards
Bob

My 70-200 f4l is a fairly new acquisition, but from what I've seen it's so good that there's just no reason to stop down, colours and contrast in particular are probably a hint better than anything else I own, and it's comparably sharp at 150mm f4 to my sigma macro at that same aperture

. Wide open at f4, and with the 40d set to ISO 200-400, even on pretty cloudy, darker days, you should be getting some nice and high shutter speeds that will more than compensate any shake. Other than that I'd say it's just getting used to the dimensions of the lens, and finding how you like to hold it best.

Hope that helps!!!

Costanzo · April 13, 2009

I have had the 40D for about two years now, and bought the 17-55 2.8 IS canon lens, for events, weddings, and a great walk around town photojournalistic style lens. My daughter inherited the 17-85 is, along with my rebel XT. Great lens, my copy is very sharp.

Rob C.

canon400d · April 13, 2009

Costanzo wrote:

I have had the 40D for about two years now, and bought the 17-55 2.8 IS canon lens, for events, weddings, and a great walk around town photojournalistic style lens. My daughter inherited the 17-85 is, along with my rebel XT. Great lens, my copy is very sharp.

Rob C.

Thanks Robin that certainly does help. I will just have to have more practice with it.

I am pleased to hear Rob that you are pleased with the 17-55 from what you say it really is reassuring. I bet your daughter is thrilled with the 17-85.
Regards
Bob

Costanzo · April 13, 2009

Your welcome Bob. Congratulations on being a retired police detective, I spent 5years in L.E. after college, in Michigan USA. Great experience. My daughter loves all my photography hand-me downs, and birthday and Christmas', because she usually gets new photo gear, of some form or another.

Rob C.

17-55mm

Comments