Affinity Photo - professional photo editing with 50% off!

Canon 17-55mm 2.8 IS USM


SlowSong Plus
11 8.3k 30 England
26 Dec 2013 10:31AM
I was just looking at this, now rather old, lens with a view to getting a fairly fast lens for low light stuff or photographing concerts or people. I was however rather amused to find this passage on a review site when it was talking about distortion:-

"Distortion is present over most of the 17-55mm focal length range. Mild barrel distortion is present until about 24mm where pincushion distortion becomes present through 55mm. Your spouse will appreciate how the 17-55 makes them look thinner at the longer focal lengths (use this excuse if you need help getting spousal purchase permission). "

Now, I wonder if this was written with men, women or both, users in mind. I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions. Grin

BTW, does anyone have this lens, and if so, do you like it?

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Gaucho 17 2.8k 2 United Kingdom
26 Dec 2013 11:49AM
Brilliant!
saltireblue Plus
9 9.8k 36 Norway
26 Dec 2013 12:15PM

Quote:

BTW, does anyone have this lens, and if so, do you like it?



I don't like the lens, but my OH doesWink
SlowSong Plus
11 8.3k 30 England
26 Dec 2013 12:42PM
GrinGrinGrin
Paul Morgan 18 19.4k 6 England
26 Dec 2013 1:17PM
Gaucho 17 2.8k 2 United Kingdom
26 Dec 2013 1:29PM
That is spooky Grin
SlowSong Plus
11 8.3k 30 England
26 Dec 2013 1:29PM
How do you find this stuff, Paul!?
Grin
Paul Morgan 18 19.4k 6 England
26 Dec 2013 1:50PM
I just stumble upon them Smile
Paintman Plus
13 1.3k 177 United Kingdom
26 Dec 2013 5:07PM
I have the lens and think it's a very sharp lens straight from f2.8 through to f11. f16 shows some softening due to diffraction but it's not bad. The build quality is OK, although it's not up to 'L' lens standards. The optics are supposed to be 'L' lens quality and I think on the whole they are. There is very little CA and the distortions are easily dealt with in PS. The corner sharpness is good and better than the Canon 17-40 f4 L I used to have. I sold that lens to get the 17-55mm f2.8 because of its better sharpness and the extra stop.

The only thing I don't like about the lens is if I point the lens to near vertical, either up or down and I let go of the zoom ring, the weight will let the zoom ring rotate on its own. Frustrating at times.

Canon 17-55mm f2.8

The new Sigma is supposed to be an excellent lens if you can stretch to the price, but it has a constant f1.8 aperture.

Sigma 18-35mm f1.8
26 Dec 2013 6:04PM
SmileSmileSmileSmile
Gaucho 17 2.8k 2 United Kingdom
26 Dec 2013 6:32PM
The Sigma is the one I'm after...but Christmas is over Sad
mikehit 10 8.0k 13 United Kingdom
26 Dec 2013 8:16PM
The 17-55 is a superb lens. However a cheaper option is the Tamron 17-50f2.8 - quite a few professionals use it as an alternative and they would only do so if it was a genuine bang-for-the-buck alternmative. Optically speaking, that is - the Canon has the advantage of IS and marque.
SlowSong Plus
11 8.3k 30 England
26 Dec 2013 8:24PM
The IS is a big plus in low light and worth paying a bit more for. I like the sound of the Sigma, but not at the price.
mondmagu 9 75 Ireland
27 Dec 2013 10:50PM
The 17-55 is a cracker of a lens.Purchased mine about 2 years ago and would not consider changing it.The IS is old at this stage but the quality of the images are outstanding.Once you use one of these you will not regret it one bit!!!! If your budget can stretch to the price don't hesitste t opurchase.

Des
PD_BARBS 10 14 United Kingdom
29 Dec 2013 6:05PM
I had this lens on my 7D and loved it, nice and sharp, great focal range and IS is a bonus. I changed to full frame and went to the 24=105, and I think this lens is easily as good as that.


Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.