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

[clicknick]

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.

17-35L gives better pictures than 17-55 2.8? Sure or not? U mean 16-35L right?

Anyway, good choice on the 17-55. Since u using 400D and not the 1series, 17-55 is the best choice IMO.

 

[vector1]

Sorry to crash the thread, but Jasper, you have to work on your holding technique. I could see quite abit of shake in some of your photos, but remember the 1/focal length shutter speed still applies, IS or no IS.

 

[calebk]

Sorry to crash the thread, but Jasper, you have to work on your holding technique. I could see quite abit of shake in some of your photos, but remember the 1/focal length shutter speed still applies, IS or no IS.

Very true. Note that IS helps, but doesn't guarantee that you will be free from handshake at shutter speeds lower than 1/focal length.

 

[vector1]

Yeah, I treat IS as a nice option to have, mainly because all my shooting is done at least 1/focal length speed. IS mainly applies to static objects, where you have alot of time to steady yourself, control breathing, compose the shot, and gently squeeze the shutter release. Other than that, IS is pretty much a white elephant, as it doesn't help freeze action at all. But different people, different views, so go try it out yourself at different focal lengths and shutter speeds, and find your own limit for truely shakefree photos

 

[jasperng]

thank you guys. i appreciate your comments.
let's not OT this thread.
i really hope your kind comments or harsh criticism can be placed in flickr, so in future i am able to see my "improvement" "progression"

some of my shots using this lens are done on a rather "anyhow aim and press". so i am able to see what are the results by using 2.8 IS "wide angle" on a 1/(focal length x 1.6)
during day shoot, this lens i will set it shutter piroity with 1/100. unless i wanna play with DOF then i will adjust Av

i have 2 more events of photo using this lens have not upload. appreciate you guys to comment them after i've uploaded 'em.

TS Donny: have you bought this lens? i wish to see your results so can learn from each other.

clicknick: oh ya. is 16-35L. there is no 17-35. :sweat:

 

[calebk]

thank you guys. i appreciate your comments.
let's not OT this thread.
i really hope your kind comments or harsh criticism can be placed in flickr, so in future i am able to see my "improvement" "progression"

some of my shots using this lens are done on a rather "anyhow aim and press". so i am able to see what are the results by using 2.8 IS "wide angle" on a 1/(focal length x 1.6)
during day shoot, this lens i will set it shutter piroity with 1/100. unless i wanna play with DOF then i will adjust Av

i have 2 more events of photo using this lens have not upload. appreciate you guys to comment them after i've uploaded 'em.

TS Donny: have you bought this lens? i wish to see your results so can learn from each other.

clicknick: oh ya. is 16-35L. there is no 17-35. :sweat:

There was a 17-35 f/2.8L, but that has since been replaced by the 16-35 f/2.8L, and now the 16-35 f/2.8L II

 

[jasperng]

btw, i was surprise by 1 issue
Canon 17-55 2.8 (with IS without hood) cost $1400
Nikon 17-55 2.8 (without VR with hood) cost $2000++++
:dunno:

 

[vector1]

Different systems, different costs. I'm not sure about it, but is the nikon 17-55 constrainted like the EF-S system? Can it be used on all nikon D-SLRs? If it's not limited like the EF-S, it might command a price premium.

 

[calebk]

Different systems, different costs. I'm not sure about it, but is the nikon 17-55 constrainted like the EF-S system? Can it be used on all nikon D-SLRs? If it's not limited like the EF-S, it might command a price premium.

It's a DX lens, for use on APS-C sized sensors.

 

[unseen]

Believe what you want; I haven't multiplied it by anything since I've went digital, and it works perfectly fine.

I believe your illustration refers to a smaller image circle, not a smaller sensor. The eye (sensor) is still the same size, but your image circle (initially the whole retina, but now the straw's internal circumference) is reduced.

Actually.. nuxnewbie is right. You need to consider it in if you're using a cropped camera.

1/focal length is merely a guide for the average photographer to which you'd probably won't get visible handshake.

When you have the crop factor, your photos are cropped, "blown up", the fine lines are more visible. Thus, any previously invisible handshake are now visible.

You MUST account for the crop factor if you're the average photographer. If you can hand hold it at lower speeds, then good for you.