EFS 17-55 F2.8 has arrived
- Thread starter wong1979
- Start date
- Status
Guys, lets not get into the argument of what is better than what, splitting hairs.
Step back, GET the lens, handle the 17-55 and then come back comment on the lens la
Pls can someone with the 17-55 lens comment more on their experience and post more samples? As far as I am concerned, it is slightly sharper than the 17-40L i tested on a newspaper cutting, and that speaks alot on what it cost $1.9K. To me the 17-55 2.8 is definitely more useful on my 30D than a 17-40 f4 or 16-35 f2.8 NOW. It serves me better on my 30D. No point to me to get the 17-40 so that just in case I upgrade FF next time. I can start taking technically better/ more useable pictures now with the 17-55 with IS f2.8 now, more than the 17-40L. If upgrading to FF, then sell everything la before upgrading to FF lens too.
The downside of the 17-55 is its build, if only it metal-encased, like the 30D. And it extends quite a fair bit, unlike 17-40 or 16-35, small issue though. and of cos the high cost. but hey, imagine a 17-55 f2.8 IS L for full frame, it would have costed $3000+ easily (considering that 16-35 f2.8 L is oredi $2.3K). So it is still relatively "cheap".
Other than tat, this lens performs. If want quality, no need to shy away from it.
Strange, nikon and canon got their own series of lens, so no point cross comparing oranges and apples
just my 2 cents.
Step back, GET the lens, handle the 17-55 and then come back comment on the lens la
Pls can someone with the 17-55 lens comment more on their experience and post more samples? As far as I am concerned, it is slightly sharper than the 17-40L i tested on a newspaper cutting, and that speaks alot on what it cost $1.9K. To me the 17-55 2.8 is definitely more useful on my 30D than a 17-40 f4 or 16-35 f2.8 NOW. It serves me better on my 30D. No point to me to get the 17-40 so that just in case I upgrade FF next time. I can start taking technically better/ more useable pictures now with the 17-55 with IS f2.8 now, more than the 17-40L. If upgrading to FF, then sell everything la before upgrading to FF lens too.
The downside of the 17-55 is its build, if only it metal-encased, like the 30D. And it extends quite a fair bit, unlike 17-40 or 16-35, small issue though. and of cos the high cost. but hey, imagine a 17-55 f2.8 IS L for full frame, it would have costed $3000+ easily (considering that 16-35 f2.8 L is oredi $2.3K). So it is still relatively "cheap".
Other than tat, this lens performs. If want quality, no need to shy away from it.
Strange, nikon and canon got their own series of lens, so no point cross comparing oranges and apples
just my 2 cents.
The temptation was just too great and I just got myself a copy. Some initial observations of the 17-55 compared to my 17-40L and EF-S 10-22 (the 2 closest lenses i have):
Optical quality: The 17-55 wide open at F2.8 is very sharp at 17mm and reasonably sharp at 55mm and is noticably sharper than my 17-40L wide open at F4 at both ends of the zoom.
Size: It's as big (in fact, slightly "wider") as my 135L even before the front element extends when zoomed in. Weight-wise it's lighter even with all the extra elements and IS due to the plastic construction and probably smaller elements (i'm guessing, since it's EF-S). The 17-55 balances very nicely on my 20D with battery grip and 2 batteries.
Build: It's definately not as solid as my Ls like the 17-40 but it feels better than my 10-22. The zoom ring is pretty well dampened but the focus ring is quite sad for a lens of this price. Unless you intend to shoot in a war zone i think it will hold up quite well for even heavy usage.
Focusing: As fast as other USM lenses I guess where it snaps into focus even under dim lighting. However, the first copy i tested suffered from rather bad front-focusing consistently at 17mm (55mm was fine). The 2nd copy was perfect. So please test your lens excessively before buying, there are bad copies floating around.
IS: Doesn't kick in as strongly as the IS on the 70-200 IS which tends to give this vibrating feeling on the lens barrel. In fact, a lot of times I couldn't even tell if it was on except when I moved the cam around where you can see the image in the viewfinder kinda "float" around. As for effectiveness, I haven't really had a chance to test it under actual conditions yet but it does seem good for at least 3 stops.
I'll be bringing it out for some actual shooting tomorrow morning if the weather permits. I'll then be better able to give you guys a more in-depth idea of what it's like.
Optical quality: The 17-55 wide open at F2.8 is very sharp at 17mm and reasonably sharp at 55mm and is noticably sharper than my 17-40L wide open at F4 at both ends of the zoom.
Size: It's as big (in fact, slightly "wider") as my 135L even before the front element extends when zoomed in. Weight-wise it's lighter even with all the extra elements and IS due to the plastic construction and probably smaller elements (i'm guessing, since it's EF-S). The 17-55 balances very nicely on my 20D with battery grip and 2 batteries.
Build: It's definately not as solid as my Ls like the 17-40 but it feels better than my 10-22. The zoom ring is pretty well dampened but the focus ring is quite sad for a lens of this price. Unless you intend to shoot in a war zone i think it will hold up quite well for even heavy usage.
Focusing: As fast as other USM lenses I guess where it snaps into focus even under dim lighting. However, the first copy i tested suffered from rather bad front-focusing consistently at 17mm (55mm was fine). The 2nd copy was perfect. So please test your lens excessively before buying, there are bad copies floating around.
IS: Doesn't kick in as strongly as the IS on the 70-200 IS which tends to give this vibrating feeling on the lens barrel. In fact, a lot of times I couldn't even tell if it was on except when I moved the cam around where you can see the image in the viewfinder kinda "float" around. As for effectiveness, I haven't really had a chance to test it under actual conditions yet but it does seem good for at least 3 stops.
I'll be bringing it out for some actual shooting tomorrow morning if the weather permits. I'll then be better able to give you guys a more in-depth idea of what it's like.
Looks like Denosha has got a good copy of the 17-55 and has obtained similar results. Good to hear that.
For my copy, when i compared 17-55mm with 50mm f1.8, at 50mm aperture f2.8,with newspaper cutting --- > the 17-55 is the same in terms of sharpness with 50mm prime at 100%. But the 17-55 is more consistent with the focus and got more "clear" and in-focus sharp pictures than the 50mm 1.8 (which misses focus a few times). When both are in focus, both are equally sharp. I didnt expected the result actually. Maybe i will post some pics later.
For my copy, when i compared 17-55mm with 50mm f1.8, at 50mm aperture f2.8,with newspaper cutting --- > the 17-55 is the same in terms of sharpness with 50mm prime at 100%. But the 17-55 is more consistent with the focus and got more "clear" and in-focus sharp pictures than the 50mm 1.8 (which misses focus a few times). When both are in focus, both are equally sharp. I didnt expected the result actually. Maybe i will post some pics later.
I think there has been enough discussion about the sharpness of this lens. What about the colour and contrast? Is it "L-like"? Here's something from yesterday, shot with a Cokin Gradual Grey G2 (ND8) to hold back the sky with some photoshop processing done (my usual minimalist approach, since my 20D is set to parameter 2):
23mm, 1/160s, F8, ISO 200
I think you guys can draw your own conclusions.
23mm, 1/160s, F8, ISO 200
I think you guys can draw your own conclusions.
JediForce4ever
Senior Member
Buy Buy Buy!!:devil:Denosha said:I think you guys can draw your own conclusions.
With my current lens lineup I really have no need to go to FF other than not so impt factors like better IQ (in terms of resolution, which you don't really need unless you're printing really big) and bigger VF (nice to have but not essential IMO). Thus the EF-S 17-55 really closes the loop for 1.6x crop cameras (unless u're running the older ones without EF-S). :thumbsup:
- Status
Similar threads
