Eos 7d & 17-55 f2.8 IS

Macey

Macey

Suspended / Banned
Messages
36
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
No
I'm taking a jump in the deep end and will be buying my 1st "real" camera. I love the 7d but when it comes to a lens I'm not 100% sure.

Is the cannon 17-55 f2.8 IS USM. A good lens to start off with?? Also what other lenses are in the same league?

Thanks in advance :)
 
Last edited:
Do you mean the 17-55 f2.8 IS? If so, then its a brilliant lens :-) I had to get rid of mine as I moved to full frame, but I do miss it!

Sam
 
sam_cat said:
Do you mean the 17-55 f2.8 IS? If so, then its a brilliant lens :-) I had to get rid of mine as I moved to full frame, but I do miss it!

Sam
Click to expand...

Indeed I did mean the 17-55. Stumpy fingers, iPhone and inattention lol. Is it possible to rectify the thread title?? Or am I doomed to live with the heading lol.

Thanks for the feedback though. :)
 
I think you can (certainly can in the classifieds). Click edit on your first post, choose go advanced and change it in there... Should do it!

:)

Sam
 
sam_cat said:
I think you can (certainly can in the classifieds). Click edit on your first post, choose go advanced and change it in there... Should do it!

:)

Sam
Click to expand...

Thanks I'll see if it's accessible via iPhone app. If not I'll have to just look silly which is nothing new :)
 
Yup, that sorted it :)

And as I said earlier, get the 17-55, its a brilliant lens!

Sam
 
Yup. Cheers for the help and confirmation that the ( 17 ) - 55 lens is a good way to go :thumbs:
 
your not going to get better than a 7D and 17-55 f2.8 IS unless you go 1D

It's the perfect set-up 17-55 is a fantastic lens, one of Canon very best.
 
:plusone: for the 17-55. Fantastic on a 7D, and no, it doesn't get any better than that.

Since you ask, the 15-85 is another really fine lens with a superb range, lighter, cheaper. But f/3.5-5.6 is a long way from f/2.8 throughout, and it's not quite as sharp.
 
Imho it beats the 24-70 2.8 on all fronts except build quality (the 24-70 is a tank!)...

Sam
 
@ all those who responded thanks. Eos 7d and 17-55 it is :thumbs:
 
Exceptional lens for IQ and optics, not so exceptional build quality at this price level.
 
MartynK said:
Exceptional lens for IQ and optics, not so exceptional build quality at this price level.
Click to expand...

What is the problem with build quality then ??
 
Macey said:
What is the problem with build quality then ??
Click to expand...

Nothing. It's as good as it get this side of an L-series.

People are sometimes critical because there's fractional play in the barrel when zoomed out to max. Which is inevitable really with an extending barrel, and makes no odds. They all do it - my 24-105L is a similar design and moves a bit too.
 
HoppyUK said:
Nothing. It's as good as it get this side of an L-series.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's not badly built, but it's priced right up there with the entry level L lenses like the 70-200mm f4.0 and the 17-40mm f4.0 - which are actually cheaper - but it's not built to the same standard. I'd expect more for around £700.
 
Macey said:
I'm taking a jump in the deep end and will be buying my 1st "real" camera. I love the 7d but when it comes to a lens I'm not 100% sure.

Is the cannon 17-55 f2.8 IS USM. A good lens to start off with?? Also what other lenses are in the same league?

Thanks in advance :)
Click to expand...

What do you want to use it for? the 17-55 is the best general purpose low light zoom you can buy on a crop Canon. The 15-85 IS has a better range but inferior low light performance so is more of an outdoor option.
 
Moreorless said:
What do you want to use it for? the 17-55 is the best general purpose low light zoom you can buy on a crop Canon. The 15-85 IS has a better range but inferior low light performance so is more of an outdoor option.
Click to expand...

To be honest its more a case of getting the best all round lens while I become familiar with the eos 7d body. Then I'll be looking for better lenses for specific photography.

So from all the response on the 17-55 it sounds like the perfect lens to start with. :)
 
HoppyUK said:
Nothing. It's as good as it get this side of an L-series.

People are sometimes critical because there's fractional play in the barrel when zoomed out to max. Which is inevitable really with an extending barrel, and makes no odds. They all do it - my 24-105L is a similar design and moves a bit too.
Click to expand...

I think I can live with a little play at my "novice" level. It still seems the most logic lens for me to use while I get familiar with the 7d.

As you mentioned before I'll be on the hunt for more lenses before long. And filters oh and the flash lol then there's the tripod battery grip, the list will go on :thumbs:
 
MartynK said:
Exactly. It's not badly built, but it's priced right up there with the entry level L lenses like the 70-200mm f4.0 and the 17-40mm f4.0 - which are actually cheaper - but it's not built to the same standard. I'd expect more for around £700.
Click to expand...

I'm no expert but I'd say the $$$ represents the IQ and such and the f2.8 is appealing to me. However at that price a lens hood would be nice as flare is an apparent issue with this lens. But we pay to play I guess. :)
 
Macey said:
I'm no expert but I'd say the $$$ represents the IQ and such and the f2.8 is appealing to me. However at that price a lens hood would be nice as flare is an apparent issue with this lens. But we pay to play I guess. :)
Click to expand...

It's a very appealing lens and I'd be strongly tempted if I planned on any sort of future with a DSLR, but I'd still don't believe the build quality matches the price point.

Canon only package a hood with the L lenses. There have been a lot of complaints about this, and about the cost of the OEM hoods!
 
Awesome combination which I own, as for lens hoods they're on ebay for £5, it's just a piece of plastic :)
 
Moreorless said:
The 15-85 IS has a better range but inferior low light performance so is more of an outdoor option.
Click to expand...
If you shoot static, the IS system on the 15-85 is very, very good (claims of ~4 stops real world performance). This is immaterial if you shoot moving objects indoors mind you ;)

The 15-85 advantage is range and cost. You'd probably be hard pressed to tell the difference in sharpness between the 15-85 and 17-55. If you want to compare Canon lenses in EF-S at this focal range, this review: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Comparisons.aspx

is an excellent comparison with real world photos.
 
Macey said:
I'm no expert but I'd say the $$$ represents the IQ and such and the f2.8 is appealing to me. However at that price a lens hood would be nice as flare is an apparent issue with this lens. But we pay to play I guess. :)
Click to expand...

The IQ yes, but the expensive bit is the f/2.8 aperture. And compared to other 2.8 L-series lenses, it's significantly cheaper than the 16-35L 2.8 and 24-70L 2.8 for example, with a wider and more usable range, and IS thrown in :)

That's the upside of being designed specifically for crop sensor cameras.
 
arad85 said:
If you shoot static, the IS system on the 15-85 is very, very good (claims of ~4 stops real world performance). This is immaterial if you shoot moving objects indoors mind you ;)

The 15-85 advantage is range and cost. You'd probably be hard pressed to tell the difference in sharpness between the 15-85 and 17-55. If you want to compare Canon lenses in EF-S at this focal range, this review: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Comparisons.aspx

is an excellent comparison with real world photos.
Click to expand...

On my way to view the link thanks arad :)
 
Calzor Suzay said:
Awesome combination which I own, as for lens hoods they're on ebay for £5, it's just a piece of plastic :)
Click to expand...

Thank god for "eBay" I'll check on eBay Australia :) @ Calzor
 
MartynK said:
It's a very appealing lens and I'd be strongly tempted if I planned on any sort of future with a DSLR, but I'd still don't believe the build quality matches the price point.

Canon only package a hood with the L lenses. There have been a lot of complaints about this, and about the cost of the OEM hoods!
Click to expand...

Yeah. I've read and seen much debate about Cannon and hoods.

It wouldn't hurt them to include them on a camera lens of that $$$ but as in my other post thank god for eBay :)
 
Macey said:
On my way to view the link thanks arad :)
Click to expand...

TheDigitalPicture is a very good site, but there are issues with any test that uses a flat 2D test target (as almost all of them do) with wide-angle lenses, because they have to be shot very close up. No problem with longer focal lengths.

There are also some slightly quirky optical characteristics with the 17-55 which means it doesn't perform to standard in the TheDigitalPicture resolution test. Not a problem in practise, unless you shoot brick walls at very close range ;)

It's mentioned in the text, and also elswhere in the explanation of their review procedure.
 
HoppyUK said:
TheDigitalPicture is a very good site, but there are issues with any test that uses a flat 2D test target (as almost all of them do) with wide-angle lenses,
Click to expand...
And if you looked at the link before dismissing, you'd have seen that it's a comparison of 5 lenses of a real world scene over a variety of apertures at a variety of focal lengths ;) :D
 
arad85 said:
And if you looked at the link before dismissing, you'd have seen that it's a comparison of 5 lenses of a real world scene over a variety of apertures at a variety of focal lengths ;) :D
Click to expand...

a) I didn't dismiss it (endorsed the site acutally) and b) if you read my post properly you will see that I was refering specifically to the resolution test of the 17-55 :p
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
And if you read my post properly you will see that I was refering specifically to the resolution test of the 17-55 :p
Click to expand...
Yes you were. But the way you said it made it sound like it referred to my link ;)
 
arad85 said:
Yes you were. But the way you said it made it sound like it referred to my link ;)
Click to expand...

Oh no it wasn't! It was the way you read it :p :D :p :D

Your turn :)
 
arad85 said:
If you shoot static, the IS system on the 15-85 is very, very good (claims of ~4 stops real world performance). This is immaterial if you shoot moving objects indoors mind you ;)

The 15-85 advantage is range and cost. You'd probably be hard pressed to tell the difference in sharpness between the 15-85 and 17-55. If you want to compare Canon lenses in EF-S at this focal range, this review: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Comparisons.aspx

is an excellent comparison with real world photos.
Click to expand...

Yeah to me the difference is basically that the 17-55 is a superior "people" lens where as the 15-85 is a better "landscape" lens(better range, slightly better IS and less flare).
 
Last edited:
I think the 17-55 is just a superior lens no matter what you use it for, saying that my daughter just bought a Tamron 17-50 VC and its excellent especially for centre sharpness
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top