Is this a good deal?

[sactown024]

i found someone on Craigslist that is selling his 17-85mm USM lens for $325 or trade for a 18-55mm kit lens+ $225. First thing, I want a good lens for portraits, is this a good choice? secondly, will it replace my 50mm 1.8 as far as brokeh, sharpness and overall quality?

 

[MTVision]

i found someone on Craigslist that is selling his 17-85mm USM lens for $325 or trade for a 18-55mm kit lens+ $225. First thing, I want a good lens for portraits, is this a good choice? secondly, will it replace my 50mm 1.8 as far as brokeh, sharpness and overall quality?

I'm not familiar with canon but is that 17-85 a variable aperture lens? Like 17-85 f/4.5-5.6?

Just going on the info you posted - I'd say it's probably not much better then the kit lens (18-55) if they're willing to trade for that and a little cash. A fast prime will probably always be a better performer then a cheapish zoom. I could be wrong - like I said I'm not familiar with canon.

http://m.sears.com/productdetails.do?partNumber=00341410000P&sid=&psid=

^^^ this lens??

 

[sactown024]

Yeah that's the lens, I see mixed reviews on it....some love it some hate it :/

Anyone own this lens?

 

[tirediron]

If I may, why are you worrying about buying another consumer-grade lens if you're trying to attract clients? Gear like this does not cut it; it's not built well enough, isn't fast enough, and generally doesn't deliver across-the-focal-length-IQ consistantly well enough to be useful to a working professional. Lenses you want to be looking at are Canon's 'L' line; 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, etc. Work with what you've got and save for the good stuff!

 

[sactown024]

If I may, why are you worrying about buying another consumer-grade lens if you're trying to attract clients? Gear like this does not cut it; it's not built well enough, isn't fast enough, and generally doesn't deliver across-the-focal-length-IQ consistantly well enough to be useful to a working professional. Lenses you want to be looking at are Canon's 'L' line; 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, etc. Work with what you've got and save for the good stuff!

not everyone can afford a $1,000+ lens, I just had a baby and need to set my priorities. I thought maybe this was a good lens sense it was a USM lens, thats why I came here to ask. I am pretty sure not every photographer is carrying around L series.

but i respect your opinion and I know what your saying, just not in my budget. I actually know someone that shoots in NYC and Denver and the only lens she uses is a 50mm 1.4 USM.

 

[pgriz]

A fast 50mm prime on a full-frame camera gives a knowledgeable photographer a lot of options. But "knowledge" is the operating word. It also means that the subject matter of this photographer lends itself to be framed by a 50mm lens. So the fact that a photographer you know is successfully using this lens may or may not be relevant to your situation.

Given that you are just starting to explore photography, you need to build up your knowledge base before upgrading equipment - for example, how to consistently nail the focus, how to ensure that the light comliments your subject, how to frame the image to keep the foreground and/or background from distracting from your subject, how to compose the subject to make for a pleasing image... All of this can be done with the equipment you currently have. The next round of improvement would be the purchase of one or more speedlights (and modifiers), to give you the ability to control your light better. In practice, almost no image is customer-ready without some post-processing, so investing in a good photo-editing program (and then learning to use it), will allow you to deliver the maximum potential of your equipment.

If you are doing all that, and you are still running into equipment limitations, then by all means consider an upgrade. But if you look at the images posted by good photographers, you will find that often they are getting stellar results from consumer-level bodies and glass. You also will see people with superb equipment, posting images that are nice snapshots. The difference is knowledge.

 

[sactown024]

A fast 50mm prime on a full-frame camera gives a knowledgeable photographer a lot of options. But "knowledge" is the operating word. It also means that the subject matter of this photographer lends itself to be framed by a 50mm lens. So the fact that a photographer you know is successfully using this lens may or may not be relevant to your situation.

Given that you are just starting to explore photography, you need to build up your knowledge base before upgrading equipment - for example, how to consistently nail the focus, how to ensure that the light comliments your subject, how to frame the image to keep the foreground and/or background from distracting from your subject, how to compose the subject to make for a pleasing image... All of this can be done with the equipment you currently have. The next round of improvement would be the purchase of one or more speedlights (and modifiers), to give you the ability to control your light better. In practice, almost no image is customer-ready without some post-processing, so investing in a good photo-editing program (and then learning to use it), will allow you to deliver the maximum potential of your equipment.

If you are doing all that, and you are still running into equipment limitations, then by all means consider an upgrade. But if you look at the images posted by good photographers, you will find that often they are getting stellar results from consumer-level bodies and glass. You also will see people with superb equipment, posting images that are nice snapshots. The difference is knowledge.

I have speedlites and consider myself quite knowledegable in lightroom 4 . I am looking to upgrade my lens not because i think its going to make me a better photographer but because i want something that has a faster and quieter focus, reliable, and something that will create very sharp images. Right now I have a 50mm 1.8 prime and its so loud that it wakes my baby up when taking photos of him.

back on track, the more I read about this 17-85mm USM lens the less i want it... I have a few hundread dollars to spend on some photography equipment and I just thought a nice solid lens would be money well spent rather than a bag full of plastic.

 

[cgipson1]

If I may, why are you worrying about buying another consumer-grade lens if you're trying to attract clients? Gear like this does not cut it; it's not built well enough, isn't fast enough, and generally doesn't deliver across-the-focal-length-IQ consistantly well enough to be useful to a working professional. Lenses you want to be looking at are Canon's 'L' line; 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, etc. Work with what you've got and save for the good stuff!

not everyone can afford a $1,000+ lens, I just had a baby and need to set my priorities. I thought maybe this was a good lens sense it was a USM lens, thats why I came here to ask. I am pretty sure not every photographer is carrying around L series.

but i respect your opinion and I know what your saying, just not in my budget. I actually know someone that shoots in NYC and Denver and the only lens she uses is a 50mm 1.4 USM.

No.. there are a whole lot of amateurs out there that claim to be professionals.... and they all are using low end equipment. Look on facebook.... thousands of them.

 

[pgriz]

I'm sure you already know this, but as a rule, primes are sharper than zooms, and generally, have faster optics (ie, larger maximum aperture) than zooms. On the other hand, zooms are more convenient, and allow you to have a variety of fields of view without changing lenses. At the top end, the zooms are very close in sharpness to the primes, but this is achieved with a brick of a lens (heavy! and bulky! and expensive!). In my case, I've had the 17-85mm and upgraded it to the 24-105mm L f/4 lens. It meets my needs quite well, but it was not cheap (had to save for a year). I have other lenses for specific purposes, but this is the one that is my "walk-around" lens. However... it is not the sharpest zoom, or the fastest, and under specific circumstances (low light, or the need for a very thin DOF), it is not ideal.

If you don't mind changing lenses, then perhaps a set of primes may be the way to go. However L-series primes are all over $800 new, so perhaps buying used is the way to reduce the cost. That brings its own set of challenges. Personally, I'd suggest saving until you can afford the lens upgrade you want.

As for your noisy lens, perhaps focusing manually will allow you to avoid making the noise. To do that, you can enable your center AF point and use it to help you acquire the focus manually.

 

[rokvi]

If I may, why are you worrying about buying another consumer-grade lens if you're trying to attract clients? Gear like this does not cut it; it's not built well enough, isn't fast enough, and generally doesn't deliver across-the-focal-length-IQ consistantly well enough to be useful to a working professional. Lenses you want to be looking at are Canon's 'L' line; 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, etc. Work with what you've got and save for the good stuff!

not everyone can afford a $1,000+ lens, I just had a baby and need to set my priorities. I thought maybe this was a good lens sense it was a USM lens, thats why I came here to ask. I am pretty sure not every photographer is carrying around L series.

but i respect your opinion and I know what your saying, just not in my budget. I actually know someone that shoots in NYC and Denver and the only lens she uses is a 50mm 1.4 USM.

No.. there are a whole lot of amateurs out there that claim to be professionals.... and they all are using low end equipment. Look on facebook.... thousands of them.

I had one that I am friends with, who pm'd me to ask me if I could look over his last set and "see if I like them" I took this as asking for critique and decided to be honest...We don't talk much anymore

still don't know why he asked me? Im no pro.

 

[cgipson1]

not everyone can afford a $1,000+ lens, I just had a baby and need to set my priorities. I thought maybe this was a good lens sense it was a USM lens, thats why I came here to ask. I am pretty sure not every photographer is carrying around L series.

but i respect your opinion and I know what your saying, just not in my budget. I actually know someone that shoots in NYC and Denver and the only lens she uses is a 50mm 1.4 USM.

No.. there are a whole lot of amateurs out there that claim to be professionals.... and they all are using low end equipment. Look on facebook.... thousands of them.

I had one that I am friends with, who pm'd me to ask me if I could look over his last set and "see if I like them" I took this as asking for critique and decided to be honest...We don't talk much anymore

Understood! I avoid them like the plague!

Normally if I see somebody that posts a thread containing "I need help learning to focus, How do I get correct exposure, or how do I do this "really simple thing" and then posts another thread about "I feel comfortable with my camera, and am going to start a business".. I just add them to my IGNORE list, I figure if they are PRO's, they don't need my help!

 

[MLeeK]

You already have a decent lens in that category and a pretty good lens in the category. Why would you trade the decent one and good one for another that is iffy to decent?
People seriously underestimate the quality of that cheap kit lens. For a consumer grade lens? It's really VERY good and VERY capable.
What is the budget you want to spend here?
MORE lenses doesn't equal better. Better lenses equal better. You are not going to get the sharpness and quality of the 50mm prime in a zoom lens under about $500-which will still not have the sharpness of the prime lens. Prime lenses are the sharpest of lenses because there is no compromise across the range of the zoom.
There are a few decent zooms that will work well under the $500 mark. They aren't going to rival the 24-70 f/2.8, but they are going to be better than the kit lens and the one you are looking at.

 

[cgipson1]

^^^THIS! Good technique, good camera handling, and experience will give excellent sharp photos even with a inexpensive kit lens.

A top end PRO lens won't really help if you don't have those things to back you up!

 

[sactown024]

I am trying my best not to be rude, but i asked a simple question and now everyone is putting words in my mouth.

CGIPSON- I am sure there are a lot of amertures out there yes, but there is a middle between a amerture and a pro, there people out there that do it as a job and arnt carrying around L series lens, like Mleek said, you dont need a awesome lens to take awesome photos.

Rokvi- I was asking about the quality of a lens, I wasnt asking how to improve my skills or looking for someone to tell me learn the basics first. Just wanted clarification on a lens, hense the title.

PGriz- thanks for the kind info!

Mleek- I understand what you are saying but I am not trying to get more lens or sayign the more the better, I was actually trying to replace a lens for somehting a little better. I know the kit lens can take great photos if used correctly, but there is a reason why there are better lenses out there, right? they take better photos than the kit lens, right?

again, not trying to be rude, just clarifying i was asking a simple question about the quality of a certain lens, not how bad of a photographer I am and how I need to get down the basics first, i know that.

 

[MLeeK]

I guess I didn't really summarize my ramblings... Meds haven't kicked in yet! In short: You aren't making an upgrade worth the price with that lens.
What are you allowing yourself for a budget? We really can point you to some better equipment if you want to upgrade.