Canon EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS USM

[fz30_user]

Nevertheless, the lens does not really function at 1/60, thus, no action freezing.. the shutter speed is still essentially 1/8.

Did I help clarify or confuse you further?:dunno:

Thanks for the kind explanation. Also to Calebk Anyway, to cut to the chase. I want to buy this lens but after reading kenrockwell it changed my mind. So what I want to do now is to find a lens that is a good low light performer as this lens. I'm looking at a prime lens. Actually, I already have the cheapo/good 50mm 1.8 and very very happy with it. But don't know if it's as good in low light compared to this efs 17-55mm. I'm quite sure the 50mm 1.2 will be the best choice but OMG the price is a killer. So now it's between 50mm F1.8 or F1.4.

Btw, to cover the 17-22mm I will get the 10-22mm as always endorsed by MiniU! I don't care about the 23-49mm range I as don't use it based on my shooting pattern by exposureplot software.

Thanks bros.

 

[calebk]

Thanks for the kind explanation. Also to Calebk Anyway, to cut to the chase. I want to buy this lens but after reading kenrockwell it changed my mind. So what I want to do now is to find a lens that is a good low light performer as this lens. I'm looking at a prime lens. Actually, I already have the cheapo/good 50mm 1.8 and very very happy with it. But don't know if it's as good in low light compared to this efs 17-55mm. I'm quite sure the 50mm 1.2 will be the best choice but OMG the price is a killer. So now it's between 50mm F1.8 or F1.4.

Btw, to cover the 17-22mm I will get the 10-22mm as always endorsed by MiniU! I don't care about the 23-49mm range I as don't use it based on my shooting pattern by exposureplot software.

Thanks bros.

Bro, firstly Ken R*ckwell's reviews/comments ALL need to be taken with a HUGE pinch of salt. The 17-55 is an excellent lens, and it's the most versatile on a 1.6x crop sensor, so don't be discouraged in getting it just because KRW says so. Did you cross check with other review sites? I suggest checking www.photozone.de and www.the-digital-picture.com for their reviews on this same lens.

 

[thw]

I want to buy this lens but after reading kenrockwell it changed my mind.

Good grief!!! Do people actually believe the c**p written by THAT guy??? This dolt has reviewed stuff WITHOUT even laying a finger on the item. Sigh... :nono: :nono:

 

[calebk]

Good grief!!! Do people actually believe the c**p written by THAT guy??? This dolt has reviewed stuff WITHOUT even laying a finger on the item. Sigh... :nono: :nono:

Told you.

 

[miniUltraman]

Thanks for the kind explanation. Also to Calebk Anyway, to cut to the chase. I want to buy this lens but after reading kenrockwell it changed my mind. So what I want to do now is to find a lens that is a good low light performer as this lens. I'm looking at a prime lens. Actually, I already have the cheapo/good 50mm 1.8 and very very happy with it. But don't know if it's as good in low light compared to this efs 17-55mm. I'm quite sure the 50mm 1.2 will be the best choice but OMG the price is a killer. So now it's between 50mm F1.8 or F1.4.

Btw, to cover the 17-22mm I will get the 10-22mm as always endorsed by MiniU! I don't care about the 23-49mm range I as don't use it based on my shooting pattern by exposureplot software.

Thanks bros.

10-22 endorsed by me :embrass: :sweatsm: paiseh... I do love the lens esp at 10mm.. but too bad it is EF-S mount.. so I will still give it up eventually when I have the $$ to upgrade :bsmilie:

 

[thinkvision]

if u stick to full-frame DSLR, must forget this lens...no regret (24-70IS II coming soon)
if u stick to APS size DSLR, must own this lens...no regret also

 

[miniUltraman]

Basically, what miniultraman is saying is that even though you can handhold at 1/8 as though it is as steady at 1/60, it still cannot freeze action as though the shot was taken at 1/60. If you try to take a subject that is moving, it will still have motion blur in your shot because the shot was taken at 1/8 and that's not enough to freeze the subject and not because of handshake at 1/8. Any foreground/background that is not moving will be clear though.

Thanks flyer :sweatsm: Right on :thumbsup:

 

[zj2000]

if u stick to full-frame DSLR, must forget this lens...no regret (24-70IS II coming soon)
if u stick to APS size DSLR, must own this lens...no regret also

that 1 rumour only leh... might not come true.... but agree that 17-55 might not be the best investment... might as well pay a bit more and get the 16-35mkII L... solid build, can use on fullframe, "L" or the 17-40L... cheaper....

skali canon launch a FF 50d or 60d in 5 years time you'll be kicking yourself why you bought an ef-s lense....

 

[miniUltraman]

that 1 rumour only leh... might not come true.... but agree that 17-55 might not be the best investment... might as well pay a bit more and get the 16-35mkII L... solid build, can use on fullframe, "L" or the 17-40L... cheaper....

skali canon launch a FF 50d or 60d in 5 years time you'll be kicking yourself why you bought an ef-s lense....

Not sure about you.. but I won't wait if the lens really works for me... there is a B&S market for the lens even if you decide to upgrade to FF or 1.3x. You won't lose much... time is valuable.. but you are right.. I also like L :bsmilie: On the other hand, there isn't an L which is wider than 16mm, so I still need to get a EF-S10-22

 

[fz30_user]

skali canon launch a FF 50d or 60d in 5 years time you'll be kicking yourself why you bought an ef-s lense....

what about 10-20 years down the road when the EF mounts get obsolete? remember FD to EF transition?

 

[vector1]

SELL SELL SELL!

That said, I hope canon doesn't transit from EOS to a next gen lens mount in my lifetime (unfortunately quite likely cause I'm only 17), or I'm going to experience extreme heartache!!

 

[thw]

what about 10-20 years down the road when the EF mounts get obsolete? remember FD to EF transition?

What if the four-thirds consortium falls apart? What if Pentax closes down? What if Sony decides to sell out their DSLR section due to low profits? What if Nikon...? What if Canon...?

If you think so much, you may as well not get a DSLR and stick to your p&s.

 

[Zplus]

Thanks for the kind explanation. Also to Calebk Anyway, to cut to the chase. I want to buy this lens but after reading kenrockwell ......<snip>

:bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie: Incredible how many people read this guy.... a pinch of salt is really too little... more like a pillar...

DO read between the lines at whatever he says.....

 

[fz30_user]

If you think so much, you may as well not get a DSLR and stick to your p&s.

do it the other way... buy, buy, buy.. live for today and shoot, shoot, shoot.

 

[thw]

The Canon guys account for the crop factor for the 1/focal length handholding guideline when publishing the Lens Workbook.

I believe it to be so based on the fact that when viewed at 1:1, camera shake that wasn't visible becomes obvious in some photos.

In any case, I'll attempt to shoot @ 1/5s on my Sony Ericsson mobile with an actual focal length of 4.8mm and at around 1/30s on the A630 at maximum telephoto. Sure beats anonymous arguing on a forum.

Yes, this explanation is spot on. Ultimately, it is the field of view that matters. In other words, the crop factor MUST therefore be taken into account when using the 1/f rule.

Otherwise, compact p&s with the ultra short focal length (~ several mm) lenses and mini-sensors won't need IS. But, unfortunately, they do. And people still apply the 1/f rule to these tiny cameras & lenses by using the 35 mm equivalent focal length and not their actual focal length.

 

[calebk]

:bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie: Incredible how many people read this guy.... a pinch of salt is really too little... more like a pillar...

DO read between the lines at whatever he says.....

Actually, it's incredible how many people read and believe that this guy's reviews are accurate without a doubt. Please go drink the dead sea's contents up after you're done reading his reviews. Thanks.

 

[thw]

:bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie: Incredible how many people read this guy.... a pinch of salt is really too little... more like a pillar...

DO read between the lines at whatever he says.....

EVERYTHING that this dolt (Ken Rockwell) says is designed to imply that the Nikon gear he currently has is the BEST. All the competitors must therefore DIE.

Remember how, at one point, he decides to compare the Canon 5D image to some compact p&s? He then goes on to say there is no difference (of course, he also conveniently forgets to shoot under low-light conditions when flash is NOT desired/allowed). Although the bottom-line (ultimately, what really matters is the photographer who knows the strengths and limitations of his gear) is right, for some 'obscure' reason, he decides to choose a Canon camera to illustrate his point, and not his favorite Nikon D200 or D80. Get his drift? :bsmilie: What an idiot.

 

[m00nman26]

Good grief!!! Do people actually believe the c**p written by THAT guy??? This dolt has reviewed stuff WITHOUT even laying a finger on the item. Sigh... :nono: :nono:

Can you show an example of a review krw had done without laying his finger on the item?
I read some of his reviews and find quite a lot of truth in what he said actually, though some of his statements are really his own personal feel abt nikon or canon.
Looking through his lens reviews, most of it were borrowed fr his friends to be tested.

Before i buy anything, I would read through different review sites. Sites like photozone is great for measuring performance through their scientific means but i feel krw reviews sounds more like a friend telling about his own personal feel about stuff, which can be good and bad.

 

[thw]

Can you show an example of a review krw had done without laying his finger on the item?
I read some of his reviews and find quite a lot of truth in what he said actually, though some of his statements are really his own personal feel abt nikon or canon.

You need to go back quite a while when he was reviewing compact digicams (during and before the Sony F828/Canon Pro1/Olympus 8080 era...) I suppose he has learned his lesson since then... However, he revealed his true colors at that time and has lost the respect of most discerning readers. Nowadays, read his essays, and you will notice the indirect hit against anything non-Nikon.

Don't know about you. But when it comes to technical stuff, I want impartial reviews backed with detailed, careful analysis. I don't give a damn what another guy THINKS; I want FACTS.

Nowadays, there are many stupid reviewers in photography magazines (e.g., Pop Photography, Amateur Photography etc etc) who make empty statements without factual information. Have you read recent articles in those magazines when they claim the D40x has LOWER noise level than the 400D? Or that the D200 has LOWER noise than the 30D? Luckily, DPReview exists to debunk all that junk.

Photozone is a good website for lenses. But one needs to be slightly more careful with lens reviews than camera reviews because sample variation is rather common with lenses.

 

[jasperng]

i've recently gotten myself a Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM lens.
I will say it is a good lens to have for my 400D.
Although the 17-35 is gives a better image quality, but I prefer to go for the range.
My aim is low F-stop, IS. Meaning, my next lens will be 70-200 f/2.8 IS.
I've started to upload photos taken with my 17-55 IS. You can refer to the link at my signature and click on tags -> Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM
I am a pre-amatuer photographer, thus my photo looks terrible. But look at the quality of images this lens give.