Canon 17-85 to 17-55 2.8 - Worthy Upgrade?

bl0at3r

bl0at3r

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,883
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
Yes
As the title...

Am 95% set on the 17-55mm IS USM f2.8 as my only lens for 2010 on my 7D.

Just wondered if anyone else has upgraded from the Canon 17-85 IS USM f4-5.6 to the Canon 17-55 IS USM f2.8?

Was it worthwhile?
Is there a massive improvement in IQ etc?
Would you have got something else instead?

Oh and would appreciate a quick reply if possible - only got 4.5 hrs till my auctions finish - when they do the 17-85 (and other lenses) will be sold :thinking:

Rather not sell the 17-85 if it turns out I'll be keeping it instead :help:
 
I upgraded from the kit lens I had with my 450D about 18 months ago. The 17-55 2.8 IS is a totally awesome lens on a cropped camera. It is an excellent walkabout lens and is totally sharp throughout.

People will say it's not L glass. Maybe it isn't, but it is a damn fine piece of kit. You will love it!
 
Cool - Thanks Sara

I am so close to my goal of getting back to basics and actually going outside to take some shots - keep finding doubts that mess with my head :cuckoo:

I was worried that I wouldn't notice enough of a difference between the 17-85 to be worth the hassle and extra dosh.

Anyone else done this exact upgrade?
 
hi the 17-55 is a fantastic lens its very sharp and yes its worthwile go for it. im glad i did
 
I upgraded my 17-85mm to a 24-105L and then onto a 17-55mm. The IQ of the 17-55 surpasses the L, which in turn easily surpassed the 17-85mm. The 17-55 is sharp wide open and retains IQ throughout it's range. The only drawbacks are limited range and poor build quality when compared to L lenses. I also think it is overpriced by £200.
 
I have recently bought 17-55. Brilliant lens - especially for cropping but it has just gone faulty error 01. I have just bought a 7D but have not been able to try them together. I am waiting to return the lens to SimplyElectronics. Has anyone had dealings with returns to them?
 
Orville said:
I upgraded my 17-85mm to a 24-105L and then onto a 17-55mm. The IQ of the 17-55 surpasses the L, which in turn easily surpassed the 17-85mm. The 17-55 is sharp wide open and retains IQ throughout it's range. The only drawbacks are limited range and poor build quality when compared to L lenses. I also think it is overpriced by £200.
Click to expand...

Excellent, thanks - it does seem a tad overpriced - or at least could come with hood/pouch like the L's

swag72 said:
If you do get it via this route, Can I be cheeky and ask you how much you paid? :naughty:
Click to expand...

Sorry, the auctions I referred to are for my 17-85, Sigma 10-20 & my Nifty 50 - I am selling my last 3 lenses to fund the 17-55 (also to achieve my 'back to basics - 1 lens for 2010' goal).

They end in 3h15mins - same id as my username on here :whistling:
 
I shot for a year with a 30D and 17-85 before upgrading to the 17-55. I quite liked the lens, but did find the variable aperture to be a pain, especially when wanting to use manual exposure. At the long end the 17-85 is not a bad performer, but at f/5.6 it is pretty slow. At the wide end it was passable on the 30D, if you accept the barrel distortion (seldom a problem in practice), but a bit soft for use on a camera like the 7D. Mind you, depending on how large you print or display your images, even that may not be a problem, but pixel peepers are likely to be disappointed.

With the 17-55 I can't fault the performance. Constant f/2.8 zooms is the sweet spot in lens choice for me. IS is a bonus, and it is genuinely useful even on a shorter lens like the 17-55. I would not have another zoom with variable aperture unless there was no choice, such as with the 100-400.

I once shot a wedding with the 17-85. It was a very challenging experience and one that I did not enjoy. f/5.6 is not where you want to be for weddings. I've since shot four weddings with the 17-55 and by comparison it was effortless (still tough, but at least the equipment was not the issue).

I'd say the 17-55 is definitely a step in the right direction if you are more serious about your photography. The only snag is that as an only lens it is a bit limited on range. Still, with the 7D's IQ and pixel count you always have the option to crop, a bit, which should help close the gap between 55mm and 85mm, and at f/2.8 you will be able to save a couple of stops on ISO, which should mean far lower noise, making cropping a bit more palatable.

p.s. if your 17-85 does go and you have a change of heart, mine is looking for a new home ;)
 
bl0at3r said:
They end in 3h15mins - same id as my username on here :whistling:
Click to expand...

I went to check out your auction as I quite like the idea of the 10-20mm Sigma that you have for sale but now i'm a bit torn between putting in a bid for that or the Fireman Sam telephone you're also selling :D
 
tdodd said:
I shot for a year with a 30D and 17-85 before upgrading to the 17-55. I quite liked the lens, but did find the variable aperture to be a pain, especially when wanting to use manual exposure. At the long end the 17-85 is not a bad performer, but at f/5.6 it is pretty slow. At the wide end it was passable on the 30D, if you accept the barrel distortion (seldom a problem in practice), but a bit soft for use on a camera like the 7D. Mind you, depending on how large you print or display your images, even that may not be a problem, but pixel peepers are likely to be disappointed.

With the 17-55 I can't fault the performance. Constant f/2.8 zooms is the sweet spot in lens choice for me. IS is a bonus, and it is genuinely useful even on a shorter lens like the 17-55. I would not have another zoom with variable aperture unless there was no choice, such as with the 100-400.

I once shot a wedding with the 17-85. It was a very challenging experience and one that I did not enjoy. f/5.6 is not where you want to be for weddings. I've since shot four weddings with the 17-55 and by comparison it was effortless (still tough, but at least the equipment was not the issue).

I'd say the 17-55 is definitely a step in the right direction if you are more serious about your photography. The only snag is that as an only lens it is a bit limited on range. Still, with the 7D's IQ and pixel count you always have the option to crop, a bit, which should help close the gap between 55mm and 85mm, and at f/2.8 you will be able to save a couple of stops on ISO, which should mean far lower noise, making cropping a bit more palatable.

p.s. if your 17-85 does go and you have a change of heart, mine is looking for a new home ;)
Click to expand...

by far the most useful reply i have had - thanks for taking the time to respond

mjolnir said:
I went to check out your auction as I quite like the idea of the 10-20mm Sigma that you have for sale but now i'm a bit torn between putting in a bid for that or the Fireman Sam telephone you're also selling :D
Click to expand...

:lol::lol: - if you win both i'll happily combine postage :thumbs::thumbs:
 
I moved from the original 18-55 (none IS) kit lens on the 350D to the 17-85 IS USM. It was a big step forward and I really enjoyed it on the 350D.

I then moved from 350D to 40D and the shortcomings of the 17-85 became more apparent. I picked up a Tamron 17-50 as I couldn't afford the 15-55 at the time. The 17-85 didn't really get used again after that.

However, the Tamron while having great IQ, had a couple of issues for me. In low light it hunted all over the place trying to focus. The focus sounded like an airtool too, very noticeable. Also, I had become used to the full time manual focus of the USM on the 17-85. It also felt a little bit "short" at 50mm.

I eventually traded the Tamron 17-50 and the 17-85 for a used 17-55 IS USM and had no regrets. The extra length of the 17-85 would have been welcome but the IQ, IS and focus speed was fantastic. It became my main lens on the 40D up until I got a 5DmkII kit with the 24-105 L.

In my opinion, 17-55 is optically as good, if not better than 24-105. The build quality is a long way off though. Don't get me wrong, the 17-55 doesn't feel like a toy but it isn't L build. That doesn't detract from it being an excellent lump of glass though and I really hope that you win/have won the one you're bidding on. You'll have no regrets.
 
ChrisJ_SLH said:
I moved from the original 18-55 (none IS) kit lens on the 350D to the 17-85 IS USM. It was a big step forward and I really enjoyed it on the 350D.

I then moved from 350D to 40D and the shortcomings of the 17-85 became more apparent. I picked up a Tamron 17-50 as I couldn't afford the 15-55 at the time. The 17-85 didn't really get used again after that.

However, the Tamron while having great IQ, had a couple of issues for me. In low light it hunted all over the place trying to focus. The focus sounded like an airtool too, very noticeable. Also, I had become used to the full time manual focus of the USM on the 17-85. It also felt a little bit "short" at 50mm.

I eventually traded the Tamron 17-50 and the 17-85 for a used 17-55 IS USM and had no regrets. The extra length of the 17-85 would have been welcome but the IQ, IS and focus speed was fantastic. It became my main lens on the 40D up until I got a 5DmkII kit with the 24-105 L.

In my opinion, 17-55 is optically as good, if not better than 24-105. The build quality is a long way off though. Don't get me wrong, the 17-55 doesn't feel like a toy but it isn't L build. That doesn't detract from it being an excellent lump of glass though and I really hope that you win/have won the one you're bidding on. You'll have no regrets.
Click to expand...

Again another great reply - thanks for the comments

It's official - I now own a 7D body and NO GLASS - all auctions have finished, money in paypal account.

So I am now on the web hunting for an EF-S 17-55 - best UK website/shop so far - believe it or not - is Jessops at £789. They really have made some of their prices more competitive lately :thumbs:

At least I can go and pick it up instore tomorrow :thumbs::thumbs:
 
bl0at3r said:
So I am now on the web hunting for an EF-S 17-55 - best UK website/shop so far - believe it or not - is Jessops at £789. They really have made some of their prices more competitive lately :thumbs:

At least I can go and pick it up instore tomorrow :thumbs::thumbs:
Click to expand...

Have you PM'd Kerso for a price? You wont regret the 17-55, the one thing i miss with moving to a 1 series.
 
I have the 17-55 f/2.8 after upgrading from the kit lens in Nov, and i dont think it was the right decision.

Unfortunatly I've been having issues (in my opinion) with IQ, but might just be my one or i'm doing something wrong.

But the build quality isn't v gd (feels very plasticy imo), somehow fibres end up inside it, and i found after quite bit of use the i have the camera with the lens slung over my shounder i got zoom creap. Also when the lens is fully extended (at 55mm) i can physicaly move the extended part of the lens up by about 2.5mm.

So if I had choice again, i'd go back save up a bit more money and get the 24-70 f/2.8 L. So you might wanna consider that (plus the L comes with hood, weather conditioned, better build quality etc). But you never know. It could just be my len.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top