Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM Lens

[canetoad]

Hi all,

i'm considering buying this lens to go with my 400D.. anyone care to share their experiences with this lens?

 

[LowLights]

Hi all,

i'm considering buying this lens to go with my 400D.. anyone care to share their experiences with this lens?

No experience with the 17-85 but hope the link might help

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-85mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

If I may .. the EFS 17-55 IS f/2.8 is a better choice ... :thumbsup:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-f-2.8-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

You lose 30mm on the long side but gain f/2.8, which is good for available light shooting. The combination of 400D and EFS 17-55 mades a good walk-a-round kit.. :lovegrin:

From my experience of using the 17-55, this is really an excellent lens.. do consider..

Good Luck !

 

[honda]

I just bought this lens and brought it with me to hong kong. One lens is enough, didnt even use my flash much. I think its the best of the many lens i had so far ( didnt have any L lens yet). I had 24,28,40,50,100,18-55,18-50/2.8,24-60/2.8,24-85/3.5-4.5,28-105/3.5-4.5,55-200 before, now only left this n the kit lens.

 

[tamiya_model]

This lens bests others in terms of convenience, with the bonus of IS. Brought this on holiday with me and realised that despite its shortcommings, it stuck with me all the way. I can only say I recommend it. Worth every cent...

 

[ozbastion]

For what it's worth, the 17-85mm IS USM lens is recommended by 81% of reviewers with an overall rating of 7.6 at http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=222&sort=7&cat=27&page=2

As mentioned previously, the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is recommended by 95% of reviewers with an overall rating of 9.3 at http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=303&sort=7&cat=27&page=2

Depending on what you need, the 17-85mm offers you an extra 30mm, however, the 17-55mm seems to offer outstanding quality especially under low-light conditions.

Hope this helps.

 

[Kensuke]

Hmmz ... actually want to get 17-85 ...
but after see review ... somehow i wan to get the 17-55
Oh well , Problems comes .... Price and the range .... :thumbsd:

 

[canetoad]

Wow after reading the reviews it seems 17-55 f2.8 offers better image quality with less Chromatic aberration, shallower DOF, and better bokeh/ faster pics esp indoors, not to mention sharper pics even at widest aperture.

However, compared to 17-85 f4-5.6, you lose 30mm of EF-S zoom, and around $800 more (according to latest pricelists on the forum)..

hmm tough decision to make actually.. as money is still a problem

 

[DT_]

17-55 is of course better, but the 17-85 isnt quite bad neither.. and 17-85 doesnt look too bulky on 400D..

if money is a problem, then supposingly it'll be easy to make up your mind

 

[hitkhanna]

Does TAMRON SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) does not fall in the zone of consideration, while comparing the above two CANON lenses for decision to buy? I am also in the dilemma!:what:

 

[Redsun]

Does TAMRON SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) does not fall in the zone of consideration, while comparing the above two CANON lenses for decision to buy? I am also in the dilemma!:what:

well 17-50 is good too.You get the fast aperture at a lower price.But then again you lose out on the IS,which is good to have when u need it

 

[calebk]

And you miss out on USM.
Optics-wise the Tamron isn't too bad.
Build-wise, the Canon beats the Tamron (personal feel. The ribbed zoom ring of the Tamron, and just the whole finish of it, gets to me.)
AF speed, no doubt about it. USM.

Of course, the Tamron is 660-690SGD. The 17-55 is a whopping 1.8k?