Opinions on the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM?

cigrainger · Feb 17, 2007

I'm going to be getting a Canon Rebel XT soon and I was thinking of getting just the body and using this as my main lens (possibly supplemented with the EF 50mm f/1.8 II prime). I'd eventually supplement it with a dedicated fisheye/wideangle and telephoto.

Is this a good lens for all around shooting? I want to do photojournalism and travel photography mostly, but I like just shooting as much as possible.

SaSi · Feb 18, 2007

I have the 17-85 and I am quite happy with it. It takes nice pictures and although it is not as wide as it gets, I have the EF-S 10-22 to cater for the wider end and the 17-22 range of the 17-85 that delivers extreme barel distortions.

I believe I would be happier with the EF-S 17-55/2.8

It is a much more expensive lens, also has IS and much better optics (sacrificing a bit of a zoom range) but most important it has a f/2.8 apperture which means a lot when trying to focus in low light conditions.

KaraM · Feb 18, 2007

Here's a review of that lens:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-85mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

I've found his reviews helpful in choosing the lenses I have.

Big Mike · Feb 19, 2007

I have this lens...and it's a great upgrade over the 18-55 kit lens. The IS makes it a great everyday / walk around type lens.

It's one shortfall is the that the maximum aperture (F4-5.6) is not very fast/big. The IS does help compensate but only for camera shake...it does not help to freeze a moving subject is challenging light. Only a faster shutter speed (re bigger aperture) can do that.

For this reason, I had to upgrade to the Tamron 17-50 F2.8.

EOS_JD · Feb 19, 2007

Tamron 17-50 or 28-75 for me would be a better chjoice. That fast f2.8 aperture makes all the difference.

Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS is better still. It wasn't out when I bought the 24-105f4L IS which is also another amazing lens.

Tough choice but look at the above.

Big Mike · Feb 19, 2007

Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS

This is probably the best lens in this category...however, it's practically twice as much as any of the other lenses. If I had the money, I would certainly get this lens.

cigrainger · Feb 19, 2007

Big Mike said:
This is probably the best lens in this category...however, it's practically twice as much as any of the other lenses. If I had the money, I would certainly get this lens.

How does this compare to the 17-40mm f/4L?

Big Mike · Feb 20, 2007

I haven't owned either one...but from all that I've read...the EF-S 17-55 stands up very well to the L lenses. Many people think that it should have the L designation. The build quality may be a slight bit lower than L standard but it's still said to be a very solid lens.

The 17-40 L is renowned to be very sharp and it's a full frame lens. I believe it's one of the weather sealed lenses but I'm not certain. The EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS, is obviously faster (F2.8) and has IS. The IQ is said to be very high. The only downside is that it's an EF-S lens rather than a full frame EF lens and it's expensive. Many people (me included) would be wary about spending that kind of money on an EF-S lens because it would be useless if/when we upgrade to a full frame DSLR.

EOS_JD · Feb 22, 2007

Big Mike said:
I haven't owned either one...but from all that I've read...the EF-S 17-55 stands up very well to the L lenses. Many people think that it should have the L designation. The build quality may be a slight bit lower than L standard but it's still said to be a very solid lens.

The 17-40 L is renowned to be very sharp and it's a full frame lens. I believe it's one of the weather sealed lenses but I'm not certain. The EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS, is obviously faster (F2.8) and has IS. The IQ is said to be very high. The only downside is that it's an EF-S lens rather than a full frame EF lens and it's expensive. Many people (me included) would be wary about spending that kind of money on an EF-S lens because it would be useless if/when we upgrade to a full frame DSLR.

Mike
It will still retain much of its value even when you come to sell the lens. So if you ever go FF you'll not lose too much and you'll have had the benefit of using a better/faster lens.

Both the 17-40 & 17-55 are great but the addition of the extra stop and IS make the 17-55 a better choice.

Big Mike · Feb 22, 2007

I agree...and I would very much like to have purchased that lens. I guess some of us are still unsure how long Canon will continue with the APS-C sized sensor. At first, it was easy to assume that when the cost of full frame sensors came down...they would continue to reduce the price of full frame cameras until the Rebel series had them. In that scenario, EF-S lenses become obsolete for new cameras.

From the way things have been going...it looks like Canon will continue with the APS-C sensors for some time...maybe indefinitely. In which case, you are absolutely correct...the EF-S lenses will retain much of their value.