No products in the cart.
Only this weekend
Super Discount
Items on sale this week
Top picks this week. Up to 50% off the best selling products.
About this item 17-55mm wide-angle zoom lens with f/2.8 maximum aperture for Canon DSLR cameras AD and aspherical elements deliver impressive image quality through entire zoom range, Closest focusing distance : 1.15 feet Image Stabilizer lens groups shift to compensate for image shake even in dim lighting Large circular aperture produces shallow depth of field; ring-type ultra-sonic monitor (USM) Measures 3.3 inches in diameter and 4.4 inches long; weighs 22.8 ounces; 1-year warranty
To meet user demands for a fast EF-S zoom lens, Canon has specially designed a lens with a large aperture of f/2.8 for select Canon Digital SLR cameras. The large circular aperture produces a shallow depth-of-field, creating background blur that draws attention to the photographic subject. The lens construction includes UD and aspherical elements, which deliver impressive image quality throughout the entire zoom range. Image Stabilizer lens groups shift to compensate for camera movement so that the image appears steady on the image plane, ensuring clear, crisp images, even in dim light. With a Ring-type USM, inner focusing and AF algorithms, this lens achieves autofocus quickly and quietly, and with full-time mechanical manual focusing, manually adjusting the focus is possible even in AF mode.
Product Dimensions 4.37 x 3.31 x 3.31 inches Item Weight 1.42 pounds ASIN B000EW8074 Item model number 1242B002 Customer Reviews
4.6 out of 5 stars Best Sellers Rank #265 in
Is Discontinued By Manufacturer No Date First Available May 30, 2006 Manufacturer Canon Cameras US Country of Origin Japan
Product Warranty: For warranty information about this product, please [PDF ]
Would you like to
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras, Black – 1242B002
Share:
Found a lower price? Let us know. Although we can’t match every price reported, we’ll use your feedback to ensure that our prices remain competitive.
URL:
Price: ($)
Shipping cost: ($)
Date of the price:
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
/
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
/
Store name:
City:
State:
Please select province
Please select province
Price: ($)
Date of the price:
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
/
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
/
Please to provide feedback.
Submit Feedback
Product Dimensions 4.37 x 3.31 x 3.31 inches
Item Weight 1.42 pounds
ASIN B000EW8074
Item model number 1242B002
Customer Reviews /* * Fix for UDP-1061. Average customer reviews has a small extra line on hover * https://omni-grok.amazon.com/xref/src/appgroup/websiteTemplates/retail/SoftlinesDetailPageAssets/udp-intl-lock/src/legacy.css?indexName=WebsiteTemplates#40 */ .noUnderline a:hover { text-decoration: none; } .cm-cr-review-stars-spacing-big { margin-top: 1px; } 4.6 4.6 out of 5 stars 655 ratings var dpAcrHasRegisteredArcLinkClickAction; P.when(‘A’, ‘ready’).execute(function(A) { if (dpAcrHasRegisteredArcLinkClickAction !== true) { dpAcrHasRegisteredArcLinkClickAction = true; A.declarative( ‘acrLink-click-metrics’, ‘click’, { “allowLinkDefault”: true }, function (event) { if (window.ue) { ue.count(“acrLinkClickCount”, (ue.count(“acrLinkClickCount”) || 0) + 1); } } ); } }); P.when(‘A’, ‘cf’).execute(function(A) { A.declarative(‘acrStarsLink-click-metrics’, ‘click’, { “allowLinkDefault” : true }, function(event){ if(window.ue) { ue.count(“acrStarsLinkWithPopoverClickCount”, (ue.count(“acrStarsLinkWithPopoverClickCount”) || 0) + 1); } }); }); 4.6 out of 5 stars
Best Sellers Rank #265 in SLR Camera Lenses
Is Discontinued By Manufacturer No
Date First Available May 30, 2006
Manufacturer Canon Cameras US
Country of Origin Japan
About this item 17-55mm wide-angle zoom lens with f/2.8 maximum aperture for Canon DSLR cameras AD and aspherical elements deliver impressive image quality through entire zoom range, Closest focusing distance : 1.15 feet Image Stabilizer lens groups shift to compensate for image shake even in dim lighting Large circular aperture produces shallow depth of field; ring-type ultra-sonic monitor (USM) Measures 3.3 inches in diameter and 4.4 inches long; weighs 22.8 ounces; 1-year warranty
Designed to meet consumer demands for a fast EF-S zoom lens, the EF-S 17-55mm offers image quality on par with Canon’s highly regarded L-series lenses. The lens features a large circular aperture that produces a shallow depth of field, creating background blur that draws special attention to the photographic subject. The lens construction, meanwhile, includes UD and aspherical elements that deliver impressive image quality throughout the entire zoom range. And thanks to the Image Stabilizer lens groups–which shift to compensate for camera shake–the image appears crisp and clear on the image plane, eve in dim light. Finally, the lens offers a ring-type ultra-sonic monitor (USM), inner focusing, and new AF algorithms to help achieve autofocus quickly and quietly, along with full-time mechanical manual focusing that makes it possible to manually adjust the focus even in AF mode. As with all Canon lenses, this lens carries a one-year warranty.
/>
| Product Dimensions | 4.37 x 3.31 x 3.31 inches |
|---|---|
| Item Weight | 1.42 pounds |
| ASIN | B000EW8074 |
| Item model number | 1242B002 |
| Customer Reviews | /* .cm-cr-review-stars-spacing-big { 4.6 4.6 out of 5 stars 655 ratings var dpAcrHasRegisteredArcLinkClickAction; P.when('A', 'cf').execute(function(A) { 4.6 out of 5 stars |
| Best Sellers Rank | #265 in SLR Camera Lenses |
| Is Discontinued By Manufacturer | No |
| Date First Available | May 30, 2006 |
| Manufacturer | Canon Cameras US |
| Country of Origin | Japan |
Dana –
3.0 out of 5 stars
Ease of Use Perspective from an Amateur
Before reading my review please consider my perspective (and if you can relate to me, read on): I am an amateur who has an interest in photography limited to travel and friends and family. My camera base is a Rebel Xsi. I am not looking to become a pro! I wanted high quality images and was looking to upgrade from the kit lens that came with my Rebel. Perhaps, like many of you, I poured over reviews on this lens and had very high expectations when I ordered this lens. Unlike many of you, I was disappointed. Here are my reasons why:1. SETTINGS: Unless you really know what you are doing – as in you can master the Manual mode, ISO, shutter speeds, white balance, etc. You WILL NOT see a marked difference in the quality of your photos. This lens takes great pictures – don’t get me wrong! But the kit lens is comparable in the auto setting modes. This lens also will give you beautiful photos especially indoors with low light, no flash. But for my use (AF, IS, using the auto modes often enough) you’re just not going to see a marked difference. And I haven’t had the time yet to take an intro to photography class to really take advantage of this quality of lens. I’m sure many of you have… if so skip my review!2. WEIGHT: this lens is HEAVY. Can’t imagine how heavy an L lens would be. But as opposed to the kit lens which you can tell is a lighter lens, this lens will weigh you down if you’re coming from an amateur perspective and your only basis of comparison is a kit lens. Just know that it’s heavy, about 2-3 times heavier than the kit lens. It just didn’t match my needs – which is a lens I could carry around in a purse while sightseeing. I don’t want to carry the big camera bag and a purse and everything else when I’m sightseeing thus this just wasn’t what I needed.3. COST: it’s expensive, and again if you aren’t someone who has learned to master all the settings it’s a lot of money to spend. So know that to invest in it, you also really need to invest in an intro class (or have a friend that can catch you up to speed). This lens is truly an investment.So if you were like me and you wanted to upgrade from your kit lens just think about these three things before making the investment. I returned this lens because I didn’t see a big difference in terms of this camera’s auto settings and right now that’s what I’m primarily using until I have time to take a photography class. I may buy this lens again in the future. But hopefully this review will help you if you are in the same boat I was! And if you know what you’re doing I’m sure you’re amused at my review, but no need for snarky comments. You’ll notice I still gave this lens good marks in terms of quality (just not in ease of use).
10 people found this helpful
InHisHand –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Sharp Focus and Accurate AF, both at the same time
My experience with my copy of the 17-55 makes me smile for so very many reasons. First, my copy of the lens outperforms my copy of the 24-105 L in image quality and also gains in low light shooting with its faster f 2.8. That improvement in sharpness, speed, and color richness really makes me smile, a lot.Second, the lighter weight of this lens over other L-grade lenses is simply delightful.Third, the IS effect in this lens is superb!Fourth, I finally received from Canon (for only the second time ever) a lens that is simultaneously sharp and has reliable AF, both at the same time! The only other Canon lens that performs this well for me is the 40mm f 2.8 — I’m calling it my Fine Forty. (Note: the kit 18-55 lenses I have are great at AF but are too soft and lack in color richness, the 24-105 L is way too soft and its AF badly misses, the 50 f 1.8 is sharp but misses AF half the time…you get the idea…).Fifth, the AF of the 17-55 is fast.Sixth, internal focus.Seventh, full time manual focus.Eighth, very good macro focusing ability.What’s not to like with my copy of the 17-55? Well, some things that could have been improved upon: The high price tag, lack of included lens hood (a lens hood is critically essential with this lens), and no lens soft-case. But, I am still smiling!!! It focuses accurately and produces great IQ.As an aside comment I will acknowledge that it often seems to come down to individual copies as to whether one gets a high performing lens or not. What I have learned from my experiences is to stay with the camera brand lens when possible, buy via Amazon, test the lens heavily when it arrives, and if it does not AF well or produce the sharpness desired, return it and don’t second guess that decision.Viva the 17-55 and Amazon!
12 people found this helpful
GM –
4.0 out of 5 stars
Perfect range, max aperture, sharpness, IS
This lens is nearly perfect in all aspects:i) Extremely sharp at all apertures; probably the sharpest zoom made by Canon to date.ii) Great range for a 1.6x camera (x0D, x00D bodies). You’ll need two lenses to cover the same range with L lenses (17-40 f/4 and 24-70 f/2.8, while missing the f/2.8 in 17-40 and IS).iii) Constant maximum aperture f/2.8.iv) Very nice looking, smooth bokeh.v) Non-existent fringing in high contrast situations.vi) IS rocks; say good bye to camera shake, allows much longer handhold exposures.Why four stars?i) Colors & saturation are not as snappy as L lenses (visible on a good *calibrated* monitor). I guess this has something to do with the quality of glass (L lenses, for example, use a crystal called fluorite in some parts. There may be other differences in glass). All in all, colors from 17-55 are not as attractive to me as those from L glass.ii) Why so much plastic for a $1000 lens? After I used several L lenses, this lens feels cheap.iii) Canon tries to rip off customers by asking ~$40 for hood.What I didn’t care?i) EF-S. I think Canon is committed to 1.6x format for a loong time to come. Cropped sensor cameras allow smaller lenses with a higher quality (this lens, for example, is much sharper than 24-70 f/2.8 L at f/2.8). I think there will be a very good second hand market if you ever decide to sell this lens.ii) Light fall-off wide open. No problem in typical working conditions. Can be easily fixed in software. Many people do vignetting intentionally, since it helps eyes focus to the center.The competitors of this lens are Canon 17-40L, Canon 24-70L, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, Sigma 18-50 f/2.8. I owned both Canon 24-70L and Sigma 18-50, and I can say that both are pretty good lenses (sold them to buy 17-55). But, beware that no single lens is uniquely optimal! You either miss range, max aperture, build quality, sharpness wide-open or IS.If Canon upgrades the glass (i.e. color, saturation) and the build of 17-55 to L quality, that would be my dream lens. Currently, 17-55 is nearly perfect, but is not entirely so.
31 people found this helpful
K. Leon –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Pro Reviews Were Right! This Lens is the Top Choice for Rebel, D50 and 7D Cameras
I did read too many, too good to be true amateur and professional reviews about this lens before ordering it in Amazon. It was my first lens so it was hard to compare but then I got the highest rated L-series lens: the 135 mm f2.I was helping with a charity event and I rented out a full studio set with pro lighting and everything else. I took about 1,000 pictures with both lenses under the same lighting conditions, same subjects, background and similar settings in the camera (between f2.8- f3.5 and 60-100 speed.Guess what? to my surprise the 17-55mm pictures were identical in terms of image quality to the ones I took with the 135mm -and in some cases better. I got sharper, more focused pictures with the 17-55 mm. Why? because the 17-55 has a superb Image Stabilization feature and the 135 mm…does not.In addition, for taking pictures with the 135mm lens (which becomes a 200mm in a cropped camera like my 7D), I had to step back at least 15-20 feet to have my subjects within the frame. Then focusing on the right spot at that distance became challenging.The results:- 17-55mm: I got about 7 high quality pictures out of every 10 shots- 135mm: I got about 4 high quality pictures out of every 10 shotsDon’t even think which lens is easier to use. With a zoom lens that starts with a wide angle: 17mm; and has a sweet spot: 35mm, and also a good zoom up to 55 mm, there’s no comparison with a fixed 135mm lens.In other words you have to become a human zoom with a fixed lens, stepping back and forward and loosing the momentum with your clients and that special picture that you missed while trying to frame and focus your subjects.In conclusion, the Image Stabilization and L-quality construction of the 17-55 mm makes this lens the top choice for Canon photographers that own cropped sensor cameras like the 7D, 50D and Rebels. Also, the price is reasonable when comparing to L-series lenses that have IS. If I have to have only one lens, I will choose this one.
8 people found this helpful
Mevbo –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Best wide Zoom on a Crop Body Camera
After much consideration and reading almost every review available for the 24-70L, I dropped the hat and bought one. I was so excited; I could barely wait to get it. Upon my first few shots, I thought I had made the right choice and a good investment (After all $1300 on a camera lens is an investment, right?) Started to notice on anything off of 70mm (60mm-24mm), my subjects seemed blurry and out of focus. Begin the testing. This lens back focused anything but 70mm every after micro adjusting it. For some reason, when I used my 430ex flash and the AF assist on it, it was even worse. BTW I have a 50D. I am not talking barely back focusing…..I am talking feet! Did forum and internet searching and found many, many post about the same issues and how some had been able to correct by having Canon (Adjust it). So I sent it to Canon. Comes back confirming the issue and they replaced the Collar and tested. Well, that is nice, but still did it! Sent the lens back as defective for a replacement. Amazon, BTW was extremely helpful with this. Got my replacement within 2 days. Did side by side comparisons and the replacement was better. Still the issue was there. A few suggestions were to focus at 70mm, then zoom to what I want and shoot. This works! But, call me silly, for $1300 this is BS! I requested to exchange the 24-70L with a 17-55mmIS. Let me tell you how happy I am with it. The WOW factor was instant with it and the sharpness is incredible. Every shot, consistantly in focus and IQ is just….wonderful! This is the lens for the crop body camera, don’t even waste your time on the 24-70L, for a 2.8 wide zoom, this is THE lens.Update 2-2010 – Just love this lens! The more I use it, the better I like it. Now I have a new problem though: Deciding which of my keepers to delete…..
5 people found this helpful
Jersey GirlJersey Girl –
5.0 out of 5 stars
my (very expensive) walk around lens
All I can do here is confirm what other reviewers have already pointed out. This is an unbelieveable lens when it comes to quality. The color is great; the contrast is great. The image is sharp, especially beyond the 2.8 aperture. Having the 2.8 aperture was really important to me though. It allows me to shoot with available light, and in combination with the image stabilization, I am able to get some photos that would otherwise not be possible. I had tried out the 17-85 Canon lens earlier, and exchanged it for this one. Now I am completely spoiled and will probably not want to buy another lens that is slower than a 2.8 aperture and without image stabilization.The lens is definitely heftier than the kit lens, but it is not unbearable. Yes, I have some concerns about eventually upgrading to a full sensor frame DSLR body and not being able to use this EF-S lens on it, but for now, the Rebel XTi does 99% of what I want it to do. The important thing to me was to purchase a lens that takes advantage of the full potential of the XTi. Currently, my photographic prowess, not my camera body or my lens, is the limiting feature of my photos.This is an expensive lens, but the quality will be immediately apparent as soon as you upload your first batch of photos.Update: Feb 2011I have now had this lens for about four years. It continues to be amazing, especially in low light situations without a flash. You can’t beat the 2.8 aperture. I have taken a lot of “keepers” with this lens, everything from indoor, no-flash, low light high school awards ceremonies to sweeping vistas of Yosemite and New York. This lens is so good that I am having trouble upgrading to a full frame DSLR body. (Currently shooting with the Canon 40D.) I recently tried out the Tamron 18-270 pzd superzoom, but I was so spoiled by my Canon 17-55 that the Tamron couldn’t start to compare at the same range. It’s a really expensive non-L lens that will only work on a 1.6 crop factor DSLR, but it has been worth every penny.
14 people found this helpful
cheryl ross –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Very nice
Great lens. Works great in low light on auto, but in full sun I use manual settings with auto focus
Chiou Fang Kuan –
5.0 out of 5 stars
THE LENS to have for your crop-sensor camera. Excellent images. Versatile. Value for money.
I am not so much into the technical complexity of lens performance. But simply put, this is a very versatile lens that gives very sharp and brilliant images. I use this lens on my EOS 70D. It makes great portrait photos at f-stop 2.8, especially at focal lengths between 24-35mm. It is a great lens for low-light situations thanks to the image stabilizer and large aperture setting. I’m able to take images at 1/10 to 1/13 sec hand held without much problem. Landscape photos are good, although images appear a little flat and less impressive when the lens is completely zoomed out at 17mm focal length. Nevertheless, it is THE lens to get for your crop sensor if you do not see the need to spend more on an L-series lens. Truth is, I think this lens holds its own well enough in comparison to the more extravagant L-series cousins.The only downside is its weight. It can feel rather heavy especially if you are on a long trekking trip over bumpy and unpredictable terrains. Should not be an issue if you are just touring a city area with ample breaks at street-side cafes. Other minor issue is that there is no ‘lock’ switch to the lens barrel so it can spontaneously extend and ‘zoom out’ as you are walking (or trudging if you happen to be trekking).I purchased this from Amazon in March this year. I made use of Free Global Shipping but it took a long time for the product to arrive here in Singapore. Thankfully the lens arrived in perfect condition in its original packaging. On hindsight, if the purchase is going to be this big and important, I would use Priority shipping to minimize the anxiety.
11 people found this helpful
Phil –
4.0 out of 5 stars
Great value for a sharp lens.
I’ve been using this lens for over 2 years now. It replaced the 17-85mm f4-5.6 that I bought several years ago. Here are some of my random comments about it.This lens is mounted on my camera (Canon 7d) more than any other lens. It is very sharp for a zoom, and I have tested the sharpness using FoCal and various test targets. The IS and auto-focus is effective and fast enough for me. There are times when I wish it would reach a bit further, maybe, 70mm. However, for many landscape, and interior shots, it fills the bill nicely.I have not noticed any dust buildup in the lens, which was the major criticism I’ve seen for this lens. There are ways to safely clean this lens yourself, however. I found a few YouTube videos that show you how.I’ve only had one ‘problem’ with this lens. I noticed that it exhibited extreme lens creep after about a year of use. Pointing it up or down would cause the lens to creep and lose the compositions (and focus). This is unacceptable. I found a solution to this, by using some label strips (Dymo metallic) stacked along the lens barrel. This gives enough friction to prevent the creep. Thus, I deducted a star for this.I like the 77mm diameter of this lens, since I can use the same filters I use for my 10-22mm and 70-200mm lenses.I was really surprised to see that Canon lowered the price of this lens since I bought it. Back in 2011, you could’t find one for much less than $1000. I have never regretted buying this lens.
46 people found this helpful
D. N. Meads –
5.0 out of 5 stars
I Love It
I actually gave up a beautiful 70 – 200 L series lens for this one and I made the right decision for me. This camera takes beautiful images if you follow the rules of photography. Took me a bit to get myself out of the auto mode and into the manual mode. That’s where this lens really rocks! It can’t be beat for beautiful landscapes. This lens coupled with Bryan Peterson’s book, Understanding Exposure, have taken my photography to the next level!True, this lens is only going to be good on Crop Cameras, but I love my Rebel XTi and have no plans in the near future to move to anything else. My husband worried about my buying a lens only good on crops, but I look at it from a Woman’s point of view. Just because my granddaughter might grow to wear size 8’s, does that mean I should buy them for her now? Of course not. I need to buy what fits her now. This lens fits me and my camera now and for the forseeable future. If the time ever comes when I want to move up, then I’ll sell this lens then and buy what I need.Right now I need this lens and I couldn’t be happier! I also plan on buying the Canon 70 – 300 F4-5.6 Telephoto to take up the distance shooting when I save back up. It’s only in the 500.00 range, which, after dealing with the 17 – 55 and the 70 – 200 L, seems downright a bargain!This though will always be my walk around lens. It’s got a nice range and isn’t too heavy to take with you about everywhere you go. I say if you’re thinking about this one, then go for it! You shouldn’t be disappointed.
2 people found this helpful
Jessica EvansJessica Evans –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Say yes to this lens!
I bought this lens used for $400 and it was in perfect condition and came with stuff I didn’t even pay for. (Lens hood and a bag for the lens)Immediately put it on my 90D and it takes great photos. 😍 very happy with my purchase. Worked great for an indoor wedding and Photoshoot I did.
One person found this helpful
MindcontrolMindcontrol –
4.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent sharpness
Overall great lens. It’s sharp as a tack and the contrast of the images is stunning. This lens is notorious for collecting dust. All of my lens’ are in immaculate shape as I take good care of them but that did not prevent dust from collecting in this lens. It’s easy to perform surgery on these lens’ to clean them. I had it in top top shape after blowing out the lens. The whole process takes less than 8 minutes. I just wish I didn’t have to take apart such an expensive lens. I’d be happier with giving it a 3.5 rating but i’ll just round to 4 because of the positives mention above. Also, this lens, size-wise is a monster. The construction looks and feels great but you are going to feel the weight. There are comparable Sigma and Tamron lenses with a similar focal length that won’t break your back like this bad boy.
20 people found this helpful
L. Chan –
4.0 out of 5 stars
A great lens to carry if you want to travel light
After I bought my Canon 40D back in 2007, I was looking for ONE single lens that I can take on my travel, as I always want to travel as light as possible. It has to operate in low light condition as I may not always have my tripod. It has to be versatile in its zoom range as I may be shooting landscape in wide angle one day and portrait of my Mom the next. The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 delivers what I was looking for. IS works extremely well and I’ve made some street shots at night that would not be possible otherwise. I have been using this for 2 years and it’s always the lens I take with me if I’m required to carry only one.The sole complain I have with this lens is flare, even with the lens hood. It doesn’t improve much if I use larger apertures. It makes all the back lighting and sunset scenes more challenging. And that’s why I’m giving this a 4 star and not 5.
One person found this helpful
J. Nelson –
5.0 out of 5 stars
The BEST lens for your digital Rebel – but buy a flash!
If you have a Canon with the APS-C sized digital sensor (i.e., any of the digital Rebels, or the new 7D), this is absolutely the first lens you should buy. This lens blows away any of the kit lenses, given its much larger aperture (2 full stops faster, letting in 4x the light than the f/5.6 kit lens) and its continuous aperture throughout the zoom range. Add in the 3-stop image stabilizer, and this lens will let you take beautiful low-light photos that you could never get with a kit lens.One thing to note, this lens is LARGE. So large, that it will interfere with the on-board flash on the digital Rebels. For example, on my XSi (450D), using the pop-up flash with this lens on the camera casts a substantial shadow in the lower portion of the image, which is especially noticeable (and pretty much unacceptable) at the wider end of the zoom range. Thankfully, this lens can handle many low-light situations without needing a flash, and when zoomed to 55mm, crops out most of the shadow cast by the lens. Still, if you’re going to be taking photos where flash may be needed (night-time, very low light situations indoors, etc.), you’ll probably want a hot-shoe mounted flash.
13 people found this helpful
Michelle –
5.0 out of 5 stars
AWESOME ALL-AROUND LENS
I waited a long time to finally buy this lens b/c of the price. It is worth EVERY penny and my only regret is that it did not buy it sooner. Finally, I can get more natural looking pictures because I don’t have to use my flash in many indoor situations thanks to the wider aperature (f/2.8). After a trip to Disney where I took 2 lenses to the park (17-85 f/4-5.6 and 50 f/1.4) so that I could get both my wide angle pictures during the day and really cool night pictures of the castle, I realized how silly it was that I didn’t just have one great lens that I was happy to have on my camera all of the time. Now the only time I take this off my camera is for sporting events when I need my 70-200 f/2.8. Yes, I sometimes wish it could zoom closer than 55 mm but I wouldn’t give up my wide 17 mm range (on a 1.6 crop camera) for anything. I love being able to get the group shots and all of the scene that others cannot at 24 mm. I highly recommend this lens for everyday use and beautiful, natural looking low-light photography!
3 people found this helpful
HT –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Very good lens with excellent optics
I have this lens for a couple of months now and it has become my walk-around lens. Most of the pictures are much sharper than ones taken with the kit-lens. My XT is able to focus faster when taking pictures at night w/o flash. I used ISO400 and most of the pictures looks very clean. One thing is, the battery run down a little faster than normal. I think it’s must be the IS feature that I leave ON most of the time.One thing I am afraid of is dust. I think dust will get inside sooner or later. I reluctant to take that lens to dusty area (like pumpkin-patch, corn-maze).Even with 580EX flash gun, for anything closer than 3ft, pictures with flash still have the dark shade of the lens. I think this lens is a little big for the on-board flash.Overall, I am very happy with the lens. I am still learning digital photography.2011-11-15 Update:Now I’m shooting a 40D with this lens over 90% of the time. I’m extremely happy with the lens. At night, I use it with the 580EX flash gun. Focusing in dim light has never been a problem (restaurant at night). Thumb all the way up!
9 people found this helpful
Laurie McDonagh –
4.0 out of 5 stars
Pricey, but I like this lens
From what I’ve heard, the reason this lens doesn’t have the coveted “L” series rating is because it’s not made to also work on the full frame sensors. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I will say that I love this lens anyway. I found it to be nice and sharp, color quality is excellent and the zoom range really works for me. I’m enjoying this lens more than my 24-70L and think it will also be on the camera more. Wish I’d bought this one first because I probably wouldn’t have bought the other. I know I’m in the minority, but I’m rather wary about having IS on my lenses, so that’s one of my concerns with this one. It seems that people are paying for hefty IS repairs right after the warrantee expires. As a result, I’ll probably keep it off almost all the time. It would have been nice to have the choice of buying the f2.8 without it.
One person found this helpful
Robert S –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Great lens!
I am a serious amateur, and I have found this lens to be a tremendous improvement over the kit lens. The quality of my photos has improved greatly, and I have just begun to learn how to use its true capability. Sharpness, contrast, color and the ability to keep the subject in sharp focus with the background soft are excellent. I am shooting a lot more in available light and achieving very interesting results. The lens is fairly heavy, compared with the kit lens, and large due to the IS. I think a similar quality lens without IS would also be an attractive alternative if it were significantly lighter and smaller. Using it on a Rebel XT body, I find that it is fatiguing to the fingers to hold the weight of the lens on the small body, so I may investigate adding the battery grip for more leverage and comfort or consider getting a larger body. It is worth it for this lens.I also bought the Canon 430 flash with a Sto-Fen diffuser, and they make a great team with this lens. I feel like a pro when I shoot now, and my results are getting there.
11 people found this helpful
Michael Morgan –
4.0 out of 5 stars
Fast and Sharp But Comes Up Short on the Long End
Purchased last December to upgrade the Canon 17-85mm IS “kit lens” that came with my 20D. Careful testing showed this new lens to be about “one-stop sharper” over the 17-35mm range than the kit lens. What I mean by this is that the 17-55 matched the 17-85 sharpness with one stop faster aperture: same sharpness at f2.8 for 17mm as the 17-85 at f4.0. Beyond 35mm the sharpness of the 17-55 faded until both lenses were essentially equal in sharpness at 55mm. The 17-55 was noticibly softer at 55mm than at 17mm while the 17-85 was sharper at 55mm than at 17mm. So, the advantage of f2.8 and better sharpness at the wide end for the 17-55 is at least partially negated by diminished sharpness at the meager 55mm long end. The 17-85 has about the same build quality but is smaller, lighter, covers a longer focal length range and for me is a better deal at about half the price.
6 people found this helpful
LXPAULS –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Securely packaged!
I’m a rookie photographer and this lens was affordable for me as I learn. This was SO securely packaged for shipping! I was VERY impressed. It came right on time and the condition is excellent.
Chien Harriman –
5.0 out of 5 stars
awesome lens
I love this lens. A lot of my friends who have looked at the pictures also agree that it takes great photos. The image stabilization is a really nice feature, it lets you just walk and click, making it super easy to take pictures of people/things while you walk. I found myself just holding my finger over the shoot button after a while, because it was such a joy to take pictures with this thing.I don’t know anyone who hasn’t liked this lens. For someone who is looking to buy their first serious lens, this a a pretty good selection, I think. It takes great portraits, has fairly wide angle so you can capture scenes, and the image stabilization is cool especially the more you start playing with f-stops and film speeds. You can get a lot of cool blur effects without much work, just like magic.It also took a great night picture for me, that I’ve become really proud of. I can’t say enough good things about this lens.FYI, my camera body is a Canon EOS 400D.
Pseudorandom –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Big and heavy … but the best you can get for cropped sensors
I’ve been using this lens for about 6 months on 40D in a variety of conditions. Fairly dusty hikes and light rain. This lens has not failed to impress me. Sharp and fast. And I’m quite spoiled: I’ve sold 17-85 as it did disappoint me a few times in several respects and I own some of the sharpest primes. Also it has virtually no chromatic aberrations or distortion.The only significant drawback of it is the size/weight. It’s just too big for casual photography. It does inevitably attract more attention than smaller and more compact zooms. Funnily most people expect it to be some sort of 20x superzoom and can’t believe that it’s just about 3x zoom. Also it’s long length makes it a bit problematic to use with flash. When extended it creates a large shadow on the picture.It is also rather expensive … but once you put it to some use you’ll not regret the money.Finally I’d be certainly happier if Canon has included the hood. A $2 piece of plastic that they charge $30-40 when bought separately.
2 people found this helpful
L.A. Perkins –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Timing is everything!
I waited two years to buy this lens and when my kit lens broke I sucked it up and bought. The price had stayed stable for that period of time so I didn’t expect any major deal to appear anytime soon. Then two weeks after purchase, the price dropped by almost $200. So you can thank me for that! But regarding this lens, I have rented it for many a portrait and wedding session (as backup) to a full frame and the quality of images is “L” for sure. Very solid, and probablly the best crop camera lens for the Canon that you can buy. I definately will be getting the 7D Mark II when it comes out next year (fingers crossed) and this lens will be perfect for it. As I’ve said, I’ve rented it prior and talking with Lens Rentals staff, the reliablity of this lens has improved significantly over the last few years. And now at a mid $800s price, you can’t do better! Or you can buy mine for $1,049!!
3 people found this helpful
The VorlonThe Vorlon –
5.0 out of 5 stars
This is an excellent lens – incredibly sharp
This is an excellent lens – incredibly sharp, with an wide-open f/2.8 aperture across the entire zoom range, the EF-17-55 f/2.8 is a lens that I can highly recommend for Canon DSLR users with APS-C bodies (the xxxD, xxD and 7D series DSLR). This particular lens is very much on par with some of the Canon L series lens in the same focal distance range, including the EF 17-40L and the EF 16-35L. I suspect that if this wasn’t an EF-S lens for APS-C sensors, Canon would have slapped an L designation on this lens.Update 3-2-2016I have been using this lens for a little over a year now and it is still my go-to lens for portrait work and for action photography in low light at close distances (I go to a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 for longer reach indoor events). Excellent optics, fast focus – coupled with a 7D Mark II or a 70D and you have an excellent combination.
3 people found this helpful
rakearley –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Finally!
I’ve lusted for this lens ever since I bought my XTi six years ago. I’ve been unable to rationalize its expense until now and still cringed a bit when I ordered it, but am glad I did. In a nutshell, it’s everything it’s hyped to be. I’m an amateur and not one for running tests or that sort of thing, so no critical data is forthcoming other than I’ve been using it a lot and am very pleased with the results. Sharp, quick (silent) focusing, perhaps the most useful of zoom ranges and the F2.8 aperture makes for a nice bright image in the viewfinder as well as selective focus capability. The IS is just icing on the cake.If there’s a caveat, it’s heavy – but then it takes a fair amount of glass to do what it does, doesn’t it?A UV filter and lens shade (buy the Canon) are essential additions, don’t leave home without them. That said, only you can justify the stiff purchase price but it only hurts for a little while and the images you’ll be putting up on your monitor will blow you away.
3 people found this helpful
Sam Bailey –
4.0 out of 5 stars
It’s a really nice lens, for every day use.
Nice lens for everyday use. Picture and build quality is really good.
One person found this helpful
Gregory Beggs –
3.0 out of 5 stars
Recently dropped mine.
After snapping about 150,000 with this, I can say that it’s a solid lens with the following Con’s that prevented me from buying again:- Lens creep– point it down, and it zooms in for you. Sadly not adjustable ( I’ve torn down the lens trying.)- Strong enough distortion that I almost always correct in Lightroom– resulting in slight image quality loss.- My particular lens (“my copy”) was soft, compared to my 24-70 f/4, and due to the incident rate of this happening to other people, it’s possible that Canon has a quality control issue and I really don’t want to risk getting a moderate-to-sad one again.All the other criticisms I’ve heard, such as dust or bokeh rings, have not ever affected actual image quality.I assume the price has dropped over the years due to some really good competition from other lens-makers. I would strongly consider the competition– Canon is almost overcharging just for the badging.Used on T1, T5, 80D, 90D
4 people found this helpful
Kati Mendez –
5.0 out of 5 stars
The only lens I use now!
Once my 50mm broke and my 28-135 got a big scratch on the glass, I knew I had to have a nice replacement to use as my primary lens. So I saved up and finally got the 17-55. And I will never regret my decision! The weight took a bit to get used to but overall, I have not one complaint when it comes to this lens! The picture quality is amazing and the ability to shoot in low light is outstanding! I take this lens with me indoors and also bring my speedlite to compensate, but I end up never having to use the speedlite since the lens does all the work by bringing in the best light on its own. The quality of the lens itself is very nice and I’ve had no trouble with dust getting into the glass, but I also have a filter covering the lens as well. You can’t go wrong with this lens!
One person found this helpful
B. Harris –
2.0 out of 5 stars
Very Disappointed
I really wanted to like this lens. I read so many positive reviews and so many reports showing excellent performance. Specifically, I was wanting the sharpest lens with the most detail. I don’t expect to be upgrading to a full-frame soon, so the range fit my needs better than any of the current L offerings. I purchased the EF-S 17-55 to replace a Sigma 17-70 lens with which I wasn’t entirely happy. Even though a lot of people complained about build quality, I wasn’t that concerned with that aspect; but while I found the lens to be solid, the zoom ring did not turn smoothly at all. The biggest problem, though, was that the lens was softer at any aperture and focal length than my EF-S 10-22, my Sigma 17-70 or even my old 18-55 kit lens. I don’t know whether I received a dud copy or whether it became messed up in shipping. In either case, I just didn’t think it was worth $1000 for a lens that was either that poor from the factory or so fragile that the overnight trip completely threw it out of alignment.The two stars is for the lens. I would like to have given Amazon 0 stars for their packaging. The box containing the lens had a single (1), small inflatable pillow leaving 3/4 of the box empty for the lens to slide around in. I paid $1000 for a lens and $20 for overnight shipping, surely they could have afforded to use a couple more air pillows. I’m sticking with Adorama from now on.
26 people found this helpful
Howard Roberts –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Fantastic all around lens
This is a very nice lens for those moving beyond the kit version. Super low light performance across all focal ranges coupled with image stabilization makes this great for indoor photos with no need for flash. The focal range covers wide angle to mid-range telephoto to make it a perfect all in one lens for walk-around purposes. AF is super fast and tack sharp. The only drawbacks re the cost and weight. Right now Amazon is offering this fabulous lens for $330 off; weight you will need to deal with, but it is not a bit issue for me given the many positives.
10 people found this helpful
PetePete –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Is It Worth It?
I’m a photojournalistic hobbyist and I was reluctant to buy this lens at first due to the hefty price tag and novice stature I had in photography. After begging my wife to make a super-mega birthday/christmas/all-year gift of this lens I finally got it about a year and a half ago from Amazon (Oct 2008). I do not regret it. The images it captures are among the best I get and the range of the lens makes it the highest use lens I have. Given how much I rely on this lens, I can’t imagine not having it. I considered getting the Canon 24-70 f2.8L, but since I have a crop-sensored body (Canon 40D) the range (38-112mm equivalent) wasn’t what I was looking for. The L lens also lacked Image Stabilization.Pros:- excellent image quality- useful range (on my camera 70% of time)- very good low-light capabilities- fast, silent AF system- image stabilizer works wellCons:- heavy- priceyAbout the only negative I read about the lens was that people called it a “dust magnet.” After having the lens now for a year and a half I can only say that I have not experienced that. I can see how that can happen (with this lens and most other zoom lenses), but that has not happened to me. I use this lens a lot, and it spends most of the time on an open shelf, but I have not noticed any collection of dust inside the lens.What drew me to this lens (and keeps me using it) is it’s fantastic image quality and solid low-light performance. The images it captures are often on par with pictures I get from my prime lenses. But instead of describing them to you here’s a link to our website:peteandviv[dot]com/photographyThe low-light capabilities are quite good. If the light is really tough (indoors & at night), I’m usually forced to grab my 50mm 1.8 or 85mm 1.8, but this lens does the job a majority of the time for me.Also, now that I have the Canon 7D and am learning about film-making, I’m finding myself even more satisfied with this lens due to the image stabilization system. It doesn’t magically fix all camera-shake, but it makes a difference on those subtle panning shots I take on a tripod or monopod.Recommendations:Pro – I don’t know why you’re even reading this review. You’ve got your 1D or 5D and the 24-70L (yes, I’m jealous).Hobbyist – Get this lens if you just got your tax return or some other influx of cash. You could also try begging your husband or wife, but results may vary. If you don’t have that kind of money you may want to consider the Sigma or the Tamron. They aren’t quite equivalent due to differences in range (sigma) and lack of IS (tamron), but you probably won’t notice the difference 90% of the time. I can’t speak authoritatively on that one though because I haven’t tried them.Novice – Probably best to get started with the Canon Rebel, 18-55mm IS lens, 50mm 1.8, and 55-250 IS. It’ll cost you under $1000 and you can take some ridiculously awesome pictures with that set. You could even grab all that off craigslist for under $700.P.S. When I began in photography I just wanted to get started with a budget around $1500 or less and roll with it. Now my load of photographic equipment is up over $4000. It’s like a crazy addiction!
17 people found this helpful
M –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Pricey, but you get what you pay for
I’ve been making a genuine effort to advance my photography skills as of late, and I felt ready to take on the challenge of stepping up my game and upgrading from my kit lens (Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II) to the 17-55 f/2.8.I call this a ‘challenge’ because it challenged me to shoot better in order to see the differences that make this lens worth its price, which for an amateur is nothing to take lightly.I am ultimately very satisfied with this lens as an improvement on what I had previously. I noticed a significant improvement in various aspects of my images–from autofocus time (and volume) to the sharpness and color accuracy of the final image. I decided to take the plunge just before a vacation to Italy–at the price, I needed a good reason to make an investment like this.The range is as expected. I used it as my only lens on my vacation, and I did feel like I could have used more on the long and on the wide end. However, for the range it covers, it does so spectacularly. I made more use of the full-time manual focus than I expected, although it wasn’t generally necessary due to the quality of autofocus on the lens. This only came up due to the fact that some of the elevated shooting positions were cage-enclosed, and I occasionally wound up with “fence focus”. This wasn’t an issue of the lens, but my handling of the camera.As I mentioned earlier, autofocus was quite accurate, and I never had any issue with hunting for a long period. This was aided by the 2.8 aperture, which was critical because I spent a lot of time in cathedrals, basilicas, and museums which do not allow flash. Having a constant 2.8 across the full focal range is incredibly helpful–it’s pretty awful shooting multiple shots of the same subject at different focal lengths, only to have varying quality due to setting adjustments like compensating due to the slowness of the lens at long range. This is perhaps my favorite feature–I love my 50mm 1.4, but being restricted to 50mm (on a crop body, no less) severely restricts my ability to shoot where space may be limited.I didn’t find the extra 1mm at the wide end to be a significant benefit, although I’m sure people will disagree–wider with no sacrifice to the long end is only a good thing. I just didn’t notice enough difference to be impressed by it.The real way to measure whether a lens is worth the price (which is what most people “considering” this lens are probably concerned with, in my estimation) is whether you would make the same purchase decision again. I can personally say I have no regrets and would make the same decision now, knowing what I do and having experience with the lens. The price is a bit much, and I would have probably bought refurbished instead of new (none were available refurbished that would ship in time for my trip, by the time I pulled the trigger and bought it) but I am still happy with the decision I made. I hope that as a result of this review, you make the right decision for you. I had difficulty choosing between 4 and 5 stars, based purely on the price. A hundred less and I’d have less hesitation, but in either case, I can’t justify dropping to 4 stars.
9 people found this helpful
gunmetalblue2010gunmetalblue2010 –
4.0 out of 5 stars
Blew my Mind away
I bought this lens out of seeing the good pro’s outweighing the cons and decided i needed a good serious carry around lens. I bought mine used “Like new” for a bit under $1000 and the reason i didn’t give it 5 Stars was im not sure if the USM was suppose to be slow after hearing how fast it focuses and it felt like something was moving around when im pretty sure it the glass or elements inside the lens shouldn’t move at all. Other than that here is my verdict as a amateur photographer.*FIRST IMPRESSION*Good God this front glass is huge! I never owned something bigger than a glass of 72mm wide but this one was huge! I love how big it feels though. A bit heavier than my other lenses (Tamron 28-75 f2.8 being my heaviest) but i like how it feels in my hands. It doesn’t feel very top of the line with that kit lens plastic covering the it but i did like how smooth the focus and zoom ring moved. I was very happy to see when i got this in the mail it actually already had a UV protector on the front glass so i knew it was ready to go. NOTE: i hear alot of people complaining about dust and all but really i was mainly concerened with the sharpness of the pictures as well as the colors the lens captures. Im very careful with my equipment so i do not worry about such things as build quality unless its dirt cheap and plastic breaks in case but this isn’t the case.*First time on camera*Took it out all the way to 17mm and i couldn’t believe how much i could get in it. Took some sample pictures and loved the 17mm and how sharp the pictures came out. I will note i had AF on to see how fast it’d focus using AI Focus and found it took a couple of seconds to focus, maybe i just read other reviews wrong with how fast a USM focuses but i loved how quiet the focusing ring is, especially compared to my Tamron. I zoomed in all they way to 55mm and it stayed rather sharp at the f2.8 in all focal lengths.*Practice photoshoot with friend*If there’s one thing i was happy to discover that no one really talked about, its the Bokeh. I’ll post a sample picture of one of the pictures we took but i loved how at f2.8, the subject is sharp, vivid, and very much in detailed focus. The area around her, was nice and blurred giving a great Bokeh effect for this price. Sure its not anything a f1.4 or f1.2 can do but for a low budget amateur photographer who does this for pure fun, it was worth getting this lens.*Conclusion*Love the lens, A fun lens to use and had so many great pictures come out of it. Again i wanted to give 5 stars but i think it might need a bit tuning from a repair shop. But overall LOVE the lens and amazing pictures it gets.
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras6 people found this helpful
MN –
4.0 out of 5 stars
nice
Update: I’ve had the lens for two months now.Overall, I like the quality of the build and the picture quality of the lens. It is a nice walk around lens. I do have some dust in the lens after two weeks of using it. Again, it is not a big deal unless you are OCD about such things. I am OCD about such things so I bought a UV filter for it.If you read through the discussion, people are saying you shouldn’t put a filter in front of your lens and it will affect picture quality. They also mention that UV filters usually cost $5-30 and that many “pros” don’t use filters.Of course, these are generalized statements. What exactly is a “pro?” The housewife that picked up photography a year ago and now is doing weddings? Or the wildlife photographers out in the field? I’ve talked to the “pros” around here and some uses filters, some don’t. It depends on what they’re shooting and the conditions. Then again, many “pros” already use professional lens, such as the Canon L series. L series lens have weather and dust resistant seals. So why compare that to this lens, which isn’t a professional lens and doesn’t have the same seals? Plus, if you put a $5 filter in front of your $1000, isn’t it kinda obvious that you will lose picture quality? Sorry, just need to point these out.Overall, it is a nice lens. I would recommend it as a nice walk around lens. The focus on it works great. It would have been nice if Canon included a lens hood.What filter am I using? The filter I am using on it is the B+W UV filter. It isn’t cheap.Does it affect my picture quality? None to the extent I feel like my pictures look like poo.Am I happy that dust was inside the lens after two week? My OCD self says no, but I know it is not a big deal. It’s not going to show up in the photos. It can always be sent in to be cleaned by Canon.Would I rebuy this lens? I would buy it if I wasn’t planning to go professional. However, now that I am transitioning over to professional work, I would rather go with the L series lens. The lens is fine if you don’t intend to get a full frame camera.Should I buy a filter? It is up to you and what you want from it. Just don’t buy the poor quality filters.What is my purpose of using a filter? To protect the lens so it can maintain its resell value while I save up for a full frame camera. Lets be honest, if people see dust inside the lens, they wouldn’t want to buy it.
3 people found this helpful
steve o –
4.0 out of 5 stars
Not an L lens for sealing but optically good
Nice lens but not weather sealed. When you consider the price, whats the cost of a couple of rubber O rings ? nothing. BS this lens isn’t better sealed as I had it for a few weeks before dust in southern UT made focus feel bad. I felt grit in focus after leaving it on front seat during overnite camp out with cracked windows open and some strong wind came up. When you look at what it would cost to add the seals – O rings, really next to nothing, a few dollars. there simply is no excuse not to have them. none… well except they can double the price for making it an L lens for adding a few more dollars in cost.Optically good. Not bad wide open, slightly soft but very nice at 5.6-8 as you would expect.Perfectly good for video use too as I had it on C100 for a bunch of video shooting. For video this lens certainly works well but wish the focus ring was larger. Also know front of lens extends out when you zoom which may be a factor in your choice of matte boxes, or it might hit filter in your matte box so you have to slide matte box forwards. The other thing that was a bit limiting is that when shooting interviews, 50mm is a bit short unless you are in a tight place. I like to be about 15′ back where and 85mm is nice elbows up shot. I found that while I could frame up a little bit tighter at 50mm, I could never go in for head and shoulders tight shot unless it was way too close to person….IS is mixed blessing. for general handheld work its ok but it has nasty tendency that when extreme end of its correction, it doesn’t gently recenter but snap centers. shot this in helicopter and the snap back to centers made getting shots more than 5-7sec long hard. It really needs video mode IS with soft return to center. When it is working though it can decently smooth out HH shots and make most if not all the focal range usable depending on how stready you are to begin with.No DoF markings…bad !On 60D focus was very fast and accurate. Never missed and you could shoot as fast as you could frame. On C100 it was limited to camera’s super sucky focus all the way close first then just wiggle out until you find focus. Every time. probably with dual pixel upgrade focus will be much better as it works fine on still camera bodies.Stupid thing. This is an EF-S mount. Ya ok we know it won’t work FF camera, however it will also NOT mount on my EF 1.4X Kenko extender. I don’t care if canon says this shouldn’t work, but a 1.4X would turn this into about a 24-70 F4. looking to see if either can be modded to work together.
One person found this helpful
Julie –
5.0 out of 5 stars
A Great Tool if You are Ready for it!
Yesterday I received my 17-55mm 2.8 lens. After taking a few dozen shots and reviewing them on my iMac I can already say that this will be the lens that stays on my T2i most of the time. Tack sharp images, great color and a great bokeh. I am now able to get shots I have never been able to get before. I couldn’t be happier with this lens!To put this in some perspective I also have an 18-200mm 3.5-5.6, a 10-22mm wide-angle, a 50mm 1.8 and the 18-55mm kit lens. This lens didn’t “replace” any besides the kit lens which I never used anyway. The others do a great job at what they do best and I will continue to use them regularly. I especially recommend the 18-200mm as the perfect “2nd lens” for those who want to move beyond a kit lens. I love the quality images and the flexibility I have with its huge zoom range. With the 18-200mm you will be able to get shots you would be missing with any other lens. If it could go up a 2.8 aperture it’s the only lens I would probably ever need.As another reviewer cautioned, this 17-55mm 2.8 lens not a good investment for a beginner. In my opinion, if you only shoot in Automatic or Program mode and do not thoroughly understand the interrelationship of aperture, shutter speed and ISO and how to work with them, this lens is a waste of money for you at this point. However, if you are comfortable working in manual mode where you can really put this lens through its paces, this lens is worth serious consideration!One final thought. Since you can’t correct what you can’t see, it is important to have a very high quality monitor on your computer. As I mentioned earlier I have a couple of iMacs with gorgeous displays that really show me what I have in a shot. I also have a sub $300 24″ Acer monitor attached to a MacBook Pro laptop. I would never try to use it for serious photo editing. The image quality on the Acer is total crap compared to the iMacs. Even with a nice camera and professional level lens, images always look better after a bit of tweaking in an image editing program. For the price of this lens you could buy a low-end iMac that comes with a nice monitor. It just makes sense to invest in an iMac or high-end PC with great graphics before investing in a lens of this quality.
5 people found this helpful
DrewDrew –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Best jack of all trades lens
Probably the best lens you can pair with the Canon 80D and that’s what I did. The focal length is great as a versatile walking lens on the cropped 80d sensor. The added image stabilization is also a very nice feature of this lens to pair with the video capabilities of the 80D.Pros:- The quality of the images is definitely good, not the best lens, but it is almost impossible to find another lens that can beat the versatility here. You could probably find better primes, but none in a 35mm (cropped sensor equivalent) with image stabilization and that fast 2.8 aperture.- The auto focus worked great, was plenty fast and is pretty quiet. Not as quiet as the STM, but quiet enough to get usable audio from the onboard mic in a pinch.- Image stabilization is a must for hand-held video shots and allows for hand-held shots at slower shutter speeds.- While the lens is heavy, I also have used the Sigma 35mm f1.4 ART lens and that lens is even heavier so, I guess it’s all relative.Cons:- Very big lens (the wide range of focal lengths means the lens is long)- In addition to the length, the diameter is 77mm which is also quite big.- No lens hood included (I reviewed the lens hood, and made comments about the enormous size of that hood and the high price)- Very expensive lens considering that it is an EF-S mount, which I believe means that you can’t use it on a full-size body. So, if you ever decide to go to a full-size body, you can’t take this lens with you.Conclusion:While there are a long list of negatives for this lens, they are not deal breakers. Again, you would be buying this for an APS-C camera and that would make this focal range more like 27-88mm which is a great range for walking around. The fast aperture at every focal length, and image stabilization make this an all-in-one lens. You could definitely carry around a few lenses which might be better, but most of then don’t have image stabilization if you want to take video, plus you would need to be changing lenses constantly. This was the main lens I used on my trip and there is no single lens that could replace it. I highly recommend it if you are starting out and just want one lens to last a while.
48 people found this helpful
B. Lee –
3.0 out of 5 stars
I think I got a bad copy
When I get something that I think is defective, I’m torn about writing a review. So let me just say this: from all the other reviews here, even the most negative ones, I’m pretty sure I just got a bad copy of this lens. So sure that even though I returned this one, I’m still thinking about buying another one at some point in the future. The copy of this lens that I got produced nothing but soft images, with some chromatic aberrations the likes of which I haven’t seen in any other SLR lens, on the level of a cheap point and shoot. And since my review is probably the only one you or I will read that will make that claim of this lens, I think this one was a fluke.I had a Tamron 17-50 before this, so I can compare some to that. When I noticed that the photos looked so bad, I took some shots to test focus, and found that the lens was slightly front focusing about half the time. This seems to be common in Canon lenses, and Canon will happily readjust the lens for you. Unlike the Tamron 17-50 lens, the focus was very repeatable, at a distance of 3-4 ft the focus point only wandered over about a 1-2 inch range. The Tamron easily wandered around in an almost 1 ft wide (12 inch) range in the same kinds of shots. So if this had been the only problem I would have just sent it to Canon for an adjustment. But even the best focus point was soft and fuzzy, which once again, from all accounts (other than mine) should not be the case for this lens.Compared to the Tamron and to the 40D’s 28-135 kit lens, the built quality seemed better than either of those lenses. It’s not as good as my Canon 70-200 L, but for a plastic lens it seemed pretty solid. It’s quite large, which surprised me for a digital only lens — a little larger than the 28-135. Beyond that it’s hard for me to comment much, my copy was far softer and had much more chromatic aberration than either of those lenses, which doesn’t seem to be typical. The performance of my copy was about what I would have expected from the old XTi 18-55 kit lens from what I’ve heard, if even that good, not a lens that cost about $1k.Since I don’t think my copy is typical I’m giving this 3 stars, I guess more as a knock against Canon QA than the lens. As I say, I may buy another one at some point in the future, but I can’t get one in time for my next trip (tomorrow) so that will have to wait. If I do get another one and it’s as good as everyone says, I’ll update this review.Amazon required me to pay to have this lens returned, which is not a trivial amount since they also require to you insure it. Given that the lens seemed to be defective, that was disappointing.Update: It’s interesting to see that B. Harris had a very similar experience in a review published within an hour of mine! I gave the lens 3 stars instead of 2 because I didn’t think it was typical, now I’ll have to think about that. I’ll also echo what he said about packing, Amazon packaged this like it was a CD or book, not a lens that cost $1k, and I certainly can’t rule out that being the cause of the lens’s poor performance.Update 2: I thought I should add that a couple years ago my wife gave me this same lens as a gift (based on her own independent research) and my new copy is a full 5 star lens, it’s the lens that spends the most time on my camera. So indeed I got a bad copy that first time. That first lens was a 1 star lens, so I’ll leave this at 3 as the average of the two.
10 people found this helpful
Mike in PDX –
4.0 out of 5 stars
Returned first copy for autofocus defect, replacement works much better
I recently bought one of these to use with my new Canon 90D, which has the wonderful feature of microfocus adjustment. This feature is very important for larger aperture lenses like this F2.8 zoom lens.My new 17-55 focused very nicely at the long end of the zoom range, but was extremely erratic at the wide end. I’ve owned one of these lenses before* and was impressed with the sharpness back in the days of 18 megapixel sensors, so I’m going to try another copy. I sent mine back using the easy Amazon return process.Hopefully when I receive another copy, it will work better and I can tell you how I like this lens on a 30 megapixel camera.UPDATE: OK, I got a replacement lens from Amazon and it works much better than the one I sent back. If you are going to spend this much for a lens this nice, you really should learn how to do microfocus adjustment. This one needed +5 at the wide end and +2 at the telephoto end of the range on my new 90D. If you were using this on a Rebel-class body without microfocus adjustment, you would probably wonder why your focus was a bit off when shooting wide open. I recommend this lens for use on the larger APS-C bodies like the 80D, 90D, 7D, etc…*the copy of the 17-55 F/2.8 I owned several years ago was purchased used and had to go to Canon service three times before it worked right. My impression is that this is a sharp lens, but not a robust design. In my opinion there are no professional grade midrange zoom lens for APS-C Canon bodies, but of course you can use the EF (full frame) lenses with great results.
13 people found this helpful
Bronco –
4.0 out of 5 stars
Great lens, but cheaper, smaller kit lenses are also great.
This is a really great lens for sure. If you are interested or if you already have a copy, you can’t go wrong. I love this lens and get great pictures with little effort. My opinion is pretty similar to what others have said.Pros: Great optics, great mid-range, f/2.8 with IS across the range, fast USM focus.As a walk around lens you just snap it on and start taking pictures. It’ll catch your shot quickly and well each time, it can handle low light, fast action, and just about anything else you can throw at it. It has enough to offer that you can get creative with it too if you feel at all limited by your kit lens.That being said, if you have a kit lens you can get superb images. If you buy a Canon crop frame camera that comes with a midrange kit lens, their optics are so good that it’s hard to justify the price of this lens. In other words, this lens would be more worth it if Canon didn’t do such a good job on their kit lenses although it can focus faster even with less light and the versatility of f/2.8 across the range is nice.Cons: Cost and the size. It’s not as bulky as a huge telephoto, but you will notice the weight especially compared to a kit lens without noticing a big jump in the pictures you get. The zoom doesn’t lock and will creep on you when it hangs on your neck, adding to the size.Bottom line: it’s fun and easy to shoot, versatile enough to get very creative, and overall an excellent lens that you will not regret owning. If you already have a kit lens in this range it’s very hard to justify the cost of this lens.
4 people found this helpful
Bill –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
I’ve now had this lens for more than two months and shot more than 3,000 photos with it. Deciding on the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens for my wedding photography business is a no-brainer. Nonetheless, I did full due diligence before choosing to part with over $1000 for the glass.Key Considerations:The purpose of this purchase is to get a professional quality lens for shooting weddings to minimize the number of lens swaps I currently have to make today.Durability. Shooting weddings is not quite the same as a photojournalist going into combat. Nonetheless, equipment takes a beating from constant packing and unpacking, bouncing around in the back of cars, being rained upon, getting knocked and jostled as we move about, and being occasionally dropped. Our gear must hold up or we will discover the false economy of buying equipment twice.Weight. Wedding days are marathons for photographers that can last 8-10 hours without much opportunity for a break. That’s not much fun when you have 7lbs hanging from your neck all day and evening long. It’s exhausting. This is especially important for people with bad backs, knees or ankles. So I try to keep our equipment as light as possible without sacrificing quality.Low-light performance. One of the great challenges of wedding photography is working in bad light. Some chapels or officiates prohibit the use of flashes during the ceremony. And receptions are often at night and are in dark halls. In order to capture the action throughout, we need lenses that can perform well in low light. For me, this means a fixed maximum aperture of f/2.8 or faster.Angle of view. In the past I have used 24-105mm lenses with my 135 film cameras. I consider this focal range ideal for general people photography; 24mm is wide enough for indoor use and group shots without introducing too much distortion and 105mm is fantastic for beautiful portraiture. Our Canon camera bodies have APS-C sensors that are smaller than 35mm film, which reduces the effective angle of view of each image recorded. Placing a 24-105mm lens in front of an APS-C sensor narrows the angle of view by a factor of 1.6, making it the equivalent angle as a 38-168mm lens in front of a 35mm film or full frame digital sensor camera. 38mm on the wide end is simply not wide enough for general wedding work. In order to approximate on an APS-C sensor the angle of view that the 24-105mm lens on a 35mm body provides we multiply the lens size by 0.625, resulting in a lens that is 15-66mm.Options:There are no lenses that are precisely that size. Some L-series glass that are close include:* EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II* EF 17-40mm f/4L* EF 20-35mm f/2.8L* EF 24-70mm f/2.8L* EF 24-105mm f/4LI’m not happy with any of these for use on an APS-C body. The 16-35mm is too short on the long end for portrait work. The 17-40mm is too dark and too short on the long end. The 20-35mm is too narrow a zoom range for all-purpose work (i.e. too narrow on the wide end and too short on the long end). The 24-70mm doesn’t get wide enough. Likewise the 24-105mm, which is also darker than I want.EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USMI had intended to buy only Canon L-series lenses, but Canon doesn’t make an L-series lens optimized for APS-C digital sensor cameras. Yet Canon currently makes only two cameras that feature full-size digital sensors, the 5D Mk II ($2400, 2.5 lbs w/battery grip) and the 1Ds Mk III ($7000, 2.5 lbs.). The rest of their cameras are APS-H (1D Mk IV) or APS-C, including the Rebel models, 60D, and excellent 7D bodies.Angle of view. For those of us that shoot with Canon APS-C bodies, the 17-55mm promises to be the best general purpose standard zoom lens for wedding photographers due to its low-light performance and exceptional sharpness. It is lighter than the L-series lenses but its construction, while solid, is not as bomb proof. 55mm does not reach as far as I would like on the long end (i.e. 66mm), but it is an acceptable compromise to make to preserve the fast maximum aperture.Image stabilization. IS for a lens in this category is a thing of debate. Conventional wisdom among many is that it is unnecessary for a lens this wide. On the other hand, many reviews place the sharpness of this lens on par with or ahead of the world class lenses in this category so it seems to be good for something. Besides, I don’t always have the steadiest hands, so I welcome the technological assist. The 17-55mm’s IS is a single mode system that does not allow for panning while IS is engaged.Optics. Contributing to the 17-55mm’s image quality is the use of three aspherical lens elements and a Super-UD glass element, the kind of glass that is normally only found in L-series lenses. It features internal focusing, coatings to control flare, and a circular aperture diaphragm for buttery beautiful bokeh.What others are saying about this lens:* LensPlay ranks the lens 9th best among all EOS compatible lenses, averaging 9.3 (on a 10 point scale) from 480 user ratings.* Bryan Carnathan at The-Digital-Picture.com writes: “This lens is sharp! Wide open and from edge to edge… I expected its image quality to match or nearly match that of Canon’s L Series Lenses as it shares the L-Series UD lens elements. As it turns out, my 17-55 matches or exceeds the optical performance of my L-Series zooms in the similar focal length range… [this] lens is an ideal lens to include in your kit [for] weddings, events, parties, family activities, portraits, etc…”* Gordon Laing at Camera Labs writes, “When you also take the 17-55mm’s Image Stabilization facilities into account, you’ve got a lens which can perform relative miracles under poor light… If you’re seriously into portraits or low light work though, the Canon EF-S 17-55mm will delight.”* Canonlensreview.com “How does the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM lens compare to L-Series lenses? You will find out that the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM lens will either meet or beat the similar range L-Series zoom lenses. In many cases the image quality was better with this lens. It is extremely sharp, very fast and equipped with the image stabilizer function making the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM lens a force to be reckoned with… The Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM lens will meet and beat the standard zoom L-Series lenses.”* SLRGear.com “This would be the lens for a shooter interested in top-notch optical quality and low-light shooting.”What’s Not So HotOf course there are some complaints about this lens as well. Fortunate these are few and far between.Dust. Far and away the most frequent complaint about this lens is that it tends to suck dust into it when you are zooming in and out. However, I have not read any reviews that implicate this dust in degrading image quality. Also, there is a simple preventative measure to keep the dust out: use a filter. Apparently the dust finds its way into the lens around the front glass element. Screwing a filter onto the end completes the dust sealing. The folks that do so report no dust problem. Since I always use a lens protector filter, this is not a problem for me.Zoom Ring. I’ve read a couple of reviews that claim that the zoom ring does not turn as smoothly as do L-series zoom lenses. I’ve read this complaint more than once but not more than twice, so perhaps these are isolated cases. Or maybe the reviewers had unrealistic expectations. I find the zoom and focus rings to be adequately smooth.Incompatibility. Finally, some folks have complained that they cannot use this lens on their full frame bodies. If we had full frame bodies we’d be buying the excellent EF 24-70mm f/2.8L without hesitation, so I don’t understand this complaint.Final ThoughtsIn the last two months I’ve used this lens to cover weddings, family portrait sessions, concerts, music competitions, and a convention. This lens has been a joy every step of the way.This lens devours light and is as sharp or is sharper than any L-series lens I have seen. The auto focus is brilliantly fast and quiet. I didn’t think that with f/2.8 on an APS-C sensor that I would be able to get such shallow DOF. At the last wedding I shot I didn’t swap lenses even once (I keep a longer lens on another body). The IS motors create enough noise that you can hear it when it is really really quiet but it isn’t loud enough to be distracting. Contrary to conventional wisdom, IS really does help sharpen things up with wide-angle lenses. My only wish is that it was weather sealed for use in direct rain.The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is unequalled (including Canon L-series, Nikkor, or 3rd party) as the ideal general-purpose standard zoom lens for rapidly changing low-light shooting such as weddings for APS-C shooters.
54 people found this helpful
Steven A. HoaglandSteven A. Hoagland –
5.0 out of 5 stars
The best Lens for 1.6x Crop Canon DSLRs
I received my Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens today (12/28/06). It feels heavier by far than the 18-55mm kit lens, but lighter than I expected. Feels good (well-balanced) cradling the lens in the left hand near the base of the lens when mounted to my Canon Digital Rebel XT. I put the lens on the camera right away in a manner that would limit the opportunity for dust to intrude on the back of the lens or into the camera, since I’ve read about this lens not being sealed as well as “L” series Canon lenses. I may never take it off. 8-)This lens focuses fast and sure–even in low light, no hunting around to lock onto a subject. Pictures taken with the camera hand-held at 1/10 to 1/15 sec shutter speeds inside with no flash were tack-sharp (Thanks to the IS). With F2.8 and IS, this lens opens up a whole new world of natural low-light photography. Not only are more inside shots possible, you also have the versatility to create gorgeous bokeh. You create these bokeh effects generally zoomed to 55mm (where the kit lens’ max aperture is F5.6). Since the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 has a constant F2.8 max aperature, you don’t have to worry about the depth of field increasing as you zoom. It is so confidence-inspiring to walk around and set your aperture where you want it to give you the depth of field you want, and not really worry about the shutter speed being too slow. Some of my outside dusk (low-light) shots at 1/6 sec shutter and F22 came out sharp (Thanks again to IS). I almost got vertigo when I first looked at my pics uploaded to my PC–they were so realistic. Images really pop!The decision to go with this lens instead of some of the “L” grade lenses involved the following criteria:1. Focal Length Range. I wanted at least the range of the 18-55mm kit lens.2. Max Aperture. I wanted f/2.8, since f/4 is too confining for low-light situations. Also, f/4 doesn’t give you the depth of field limiting ability of f/2.8. Trade-off is size and weight (and price).3. Constant Max Aperture. I wanted a constant max aperture throughout the zoom range. I don’t want to set the aperture and have the camera stop it down due to the max aperture decreasing as you zoom in (as is the case with the kit lens).4. USM. I wanted the Ultrasonic Motor (USM) feature, since this is known to be the fastest and quietest autofocus technology.5. IS. I wanted Image Stabilization (IS), since this effectively makes your lens faster, because you can shoot in lower light at lower shutter speeds without fear of blur (provided the subject is still). Also, zoomed-into 55mm, camera shake can be more of a problem than at shorter focal lengths. IS has got you covered there as well. This lens only has one IS mode (no mode for panning).6. Full Format or Crop-optimized. It is true that going with a full format lens would mean that you could use it on any DSLR (35mm film, APS-C DSLR, and Full Format DSLRs such as the 5D and 1Ds Mark II). However, full format lenses are not optimized for the 1.6x crop of the Canon DSLRs Rebel through 30D. The crop-optimized lenses (designated by the “EF-S” in the model name) are tailored to the smaller image sensors of the APS-C camera bodies. The lens elements and coatings are designed to minimize the ghosting and flare that can come from reflections off of the image sensors in digital cameras. Also, the crop-optimized lenses tend to be smaller, lighter and less expensive than otherwise identical full format lenses. I considered the EF 17-40mm f/4L, the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L and the EF 24-105mm f/4L. But, none of these had the focal length range I wanted, and two of them weren’t fast enough (f/4), and the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L was very heavy (2.1 lbs). I determined there was no need to sacrifice performance now for some possible benefit later on if I purchase a full format camera. If I ever do, I would hope there would be full format lenses that have been designed to limit chromatic aberrations and introduce other digital optimizations currently provided by the crop-optimized APS-C format-only lenses. Besides, you can always continue to use your old camera and lens as a back-up, or you can sell them to help purchase the new ones.7. Grade (“L” series or Advanced Amature). Of course, if all else is equal, take the “L” lens with the red stripe. But, all else is not equal. I’d rather have an optically superior lens that is well-built (although not as well as an “L” series) that meets all my other criteria, and just be careful to keep the dust out. The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 is expensive (I paid $[…] on […]). But, I’m sure if there were an “L” series version of this lens, it would be even more expensive.Conclusion: This is one great lens! There’s nothing else out there for 1.6x crop digital cameras that gives you the sweet spot of zoom range, low light capability, depth of field control, image stabilization, fast and quiet auto-focus, and superior image quality rivaling prime lenses. And to put the considerable weight (22.8 oz.) into perspective, it is still 3.8 oz. lighter than the very good digital-only Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8, and the Nikon does not even have image stabilization (and costs more to boot). Game, set and match!UPDATE 2/3/07: I’ve taken 1000+ pictures. I’m impressed with battery life given that I thought IS would use a lot of power. But, since flash is nearly never needed (due to f/2.8 and IS), battery life has seemingly been extended. I didn’t realize how much I would grow to expect a stable image through the viewfinder until I looked through a viewfinder with a lens without IS and saw the image shaking. Note that cameras with built-in image sensors (such as Sony Alpha) don’t stabilize the viewfinder. The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM autofocus locks-on amazingly fast even in low light. No apparent optical weak spots at any focal length or aperture. Lens hood (optional) eliminated most, but not all, flares from bright sun. I think this is the best, most versatile walk-around lens you can get. I wish Canon would make an EF-S 55-200mm f/2.8 IS USM lens to pair it with so I could zoom in closer on distant wildlife, etc.
639 people found this helpful
Public Grant –
5.0 out of 5 stars
So far works as advertized
Like so many people, I bought this to replace my kit lens. In my case that’s the 18-55mm IS associated with the XSI. The main issue I had with that lens was the variable (and small) aperature. I wanted constant 2.8 without sacrificing zoom or IS. That’s what you get here.1. Optical quality. So far, it seems unambiguously better than the 18-55. No surprises there. I don’t see any issues with aberrations, though I seldom take photos fully wide open and that’s where people tend to see them.2. Performance. It zooms quickly and quietly and it has full time manual, so you can tweak the zoom after it has zoomed. It’s really nice that the focus ring doesn’t twist when it focuses. You can keep your hand on it without worrying about interfering with the focusing. It’s an excellent design.3. Weight. It’s heavy. There’s a huge difference between this and the kit lens. If I were to go on a long walk with my camera, I’d take the kit lens for weight reasons. Besides, outdoors the advantages of this lens are much less. Also this is an expensive lens so I’d never take it somewhere where it might get hurt.4. Design. The front lens is really close to the front, so watch out for fingerprints. I use a lens hood and it keeps stuff away from the glass. It also cuts down on the ghosting, which apparently this lens is prone to although I haven’t experienced it. Like I mentioned, I really just use this lens indoors. The construction has been critisized, but it feels pretty solid to me. It’s not metal, but it’s heavy, hard plastic. I have used L lenses before and unless you are coming under gun fire I see no need for the metal construction. People have complained of dust inside the lens. I have been using mine frequently for a month or so and I don’t have any dust in there at all. That’s not much time, so we’ll see. The zoom ring is very large. It practically begs you to use the zoom instead of walking back and forth. And the constant F2.8 helps encourage that. Why physically move when you can zoom without losing aperature?5. Aperature. I think 2.8 is a great aperature for indoors. It’s not so wide that the field of view is so narrow that people’s noses are out of focus if their eyes are in. It’s wide enough that you get a pleasant bokeh and take pictures in pretty low light. It’s an excellent width for indoor shots of your kids and stuff. That’s what I use it for. When I want crazy bokeh I use my F1.8 prime, which works well for that. That doesn’t happen much, though. The difference between F2.8 and what you’d be using in the kit lens is very noticeable. Totally a good thing.6. Accessories. I don’t use any filters, but this lens really deserves a hood. I can’t abide the prices canon charges for their hood here, but on ebay you can get a knockoff shipped from Hong Kong for like 1/6 the price. I did, and it’s a really sturdy, well-fitting, excellent hood.7. Image stabilization. I’m in the camp that thinks IS is really important. Shaky hands and all that. The IS doesn’t make any noise and it doesn’t noticeably drain the battery, so I have it on almost all the time. I haven’t really tested it thoroughly to see how well it works, but I assume it works about as well as other lens based IS systems. If so, it works well.So far this lens has lived up to my expectations. The USM is nicer than I expected and everything else is pretty much what people say. It’s a great lens. Overpriced, yes, but it’s a real winner. As long as you remember it’s just a lens and it can’t change the quality of your composition and lighting, you won’t be disappointed. I wasn’t.By the way, if you want something that will magically make your photos way better, get the Canon 430ex II or 580ex II external flash and bounce it, along with a DIY or Fong diffuser. That makes a huge difference. By the way the external flash is kind of necessary with this lens because it sticks out farther, so if you use the onboard lens you will get a shadow in the picture from it, especially if you are using the lens hood. Not a problem with the bounced external flash. If I had to give up this lens or my flash, I’d give up the lens.Get both, though. You won’t be disappointed.
7 people found this helpful
nate42nd –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Review from a long time user
This lens has everything I want in a lens.1. Good build qualityEverything about this lens is quality. I could ask more from the zoom ring. It doesn’t feel as good as it could at this price range. It does the job fine however. Everything else about this lens is the highest quality. I would not let this one minor thing stop you from buying it.2. Image Stabilization (seem to work to at least 3 stops…maybe 4)3. Large constant aperture (F/2.8 all the way through)4. USM focus (quick and quiet. Does the job fine.)If you have a “kit” lens (18-55) and want your pictures to look WAY better, get this lens. You must consider two things before buying. Are you planning to move to a 5D MkII or another full frame body? (this lens does not fit full frame bodies.) Is your style of photography suited to the 17-55 range? (do you take most shots between 17 and 55mm….as most people do) If you meet these criteria…..you need this lens. You may need a long zoom to go with it, but don’t think for one minute that you can get an 18-200 or 18-135 and still get the same image quality. I have the 18-135 and the 17-55 gives me FAR better image quality. If you need more zoom from time to time get this lens and a 55-250. The 55-250 is a good lens and gives you decent image quality at long ranges. It’s only about 1/4 of what this lens costs but will cover you in long telephoto shots. The 17-55 will be great for most shots most people take. It took me a long time to realize that all I needed was a better lens. I didn’t need more zoom. I finally got this and wish I had done it years ago.I have found this lens more than good in the month since I got it. It weighs a lot but I have taken hundreds of pictures and hundreds of videos with it and love it. If there was an “EF” alternative to this, I would have purchased it. There is no comparison to this lens in the “EF” line-up. Only this EF-S lens has a 2.8 aperture, image stabilization, and USM in this zoom range. All those EF lenses like the 24-70, 24-105, etc… are missing one thing or another. I looked into EF lenses first. If you want it all, this is your lens. There is no EF lens that has these features. I use it with a 7D and have had good, solid results. It will let you shoot with a “pro-caliber” lens. It should be an “L” lens and it should come with a hood.I gave it 4 stars at first because it’s zoom mechanism was not as smooth as it could have been and it costs more than it should. Since then I have grown to like the zoom ring and the overall performance of the lens made me change to 5 stars.Update after 9 months : I have used this lens a lot in the past 9 months. I could not be any happier. The one issue I was concerned about was dust getting inside. I have not seen a problem with dust. I used a UV filter for about 4 months. I then took it off and still did not see any issue with dust getting inside. I live in a dry dusty area so I would have seen the problem if it were a problem. The IQ of this lens is great! The F/2.8 aperture all the wat through the zoom range has been the best however. Other companies make similar lenses as you might know. One or both of the major companies lenses have zoom mechanisms which turn the opposite of Canon lenses. That would not be easy to get used to…but it might save you some money. I decided to go with Canon because I knew it would be good quality and I am SO glad I did. After 9 months of heavy use I cannot say enough about the lens. From handling to IQ to size and weight it just satisfies me in every way. I also have a 24-105 F/4L I really like. If I could only choose 1 I don’t know what I would do.Update 4/21/13 – I have now had this lens for about 3 years. I use it more than any other lens. I have a 24-105 F/4L which I love. The 17-55 wins out for everyday use because it can go so much wider at 17mm and it’s constant F/2.8 aperture. I have had no problems with the lens. I kept a filter on for a while because of dust concerns. I have now used it for about 2 years mostly with no UV filter. I have seen no dust problems. The lens is overpriced. I think Canon should drop the price by at least $200 to be competitive with Sigma and Tamron who now have alternatives. With that said, the Canon is still the best option for the best results. Resale will be much better with the Canon should you ever decide to sell. I would highly recommend you buy this lens. With all it’s features and resale value you simply can’t loose. It’s the best all around every day lens for a Canon EF-S mount for almost anything…including video.
14 people found this helpful
a gadget lover –
4.0 out of 5 stars
Great image quality. Dust issue=NOT really an issue
I have this lens for almost a year. Although there’re plenty of reviews, I thought I’d give my experience with this lens. hope it’ll be helpful for people still debating getting this lens vs. other L lenses. I shoot with a 60D camera body. Other good lenses in my gear, to compare this lens against, include 50mm f1.4 USM prime, 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM II.1. Image quality: really good and very sharp, as good or a little better than my 50mm f1.4 prime which I use much less now only when I really need low light or very shallow DoF. my 70-200mm f2.8L is still a little better (this 70-200L IS markII is of course the IQ king of zoom lenses and rivals the best prime lenses). I shoot mostly landscape and some home parties/weddings and have been very satisfied with the IQ of this lens.2. comparison to other lenses: Most people considering this lens also consider other L zoom lenses such as 24-70L f2.8, 17-40L f4, 24-105L f4. if you don’t plan to upgrade to a full frame, I recommend this lens over the 24-70L for a few reasons:a. 17mm is much wider than 24mm and much more useful for shooting landscape, or for taking pics of a group of people in a small room.b. this lens is sharper than the 24-70L (and the 17-40L) at all apertures and focal lengths according to the-digital-picture.com. I also read that the 24-70L f2.8 is a little sharper than the 24-105L f4. This EF-S 17-55 f2.8 lens has 2 UD and 3 aspherical elements compared to 1 UD and 2 aspherical elements in the 24-70L. Ultra-Low Dispersion glass (UD) elements eliminate secondary chromatic aberrations that otherwise reduce sharpness and introduce color fringing. aspherical lens elements are used to avoid spherical aberrations that can soften images, especially at wider apertures.c. This lens has 3-stop IS. most people think you don’t need IS at these focal lengths but it’s quite helpful in low light when you shoot a outdoor scene at night and don’t have a tripod, you can go as low as 1/5 second handheld (if you use 17mm, to avoid blur when handholding, the shutter speed recommended is 1/(17×1.6)=1/27 or faster. with 1 stop IS,it’s down to 1/14, 2 stop IS brings it down to 1/7, and 3 stop IS gets it down to 1/4 second). if you use the 24-70L on a crop body in this situation, the shutter speed recommended is 1/(24×1.6)=1/40 or faster which may not be slow enough at night even if you bump up the ISO to 3200 or 6400.3. Build quality: and dust issue that some people complain. buid quality is very good but not L quality weather sealed. I didn’t see any dust issue for a few months then noticed a few tiny speckles of dust inside after shooting a few times in windy environment at the beach. but they don’t affect image quality at all because these dust particles are too close for the lens to focus. if you see spots on an image, it’s likely from dust on the sensor. over the years, If there’s a layer of dust which may diffract light, then it may cause softness at that area. in that case, you can always have Canon clean it. dust is gonna get inside any non L lenses if exposed in a windy, dusty environment repeatedly. for People wanting L lens build quality, I think it would raise the price of this lens another $400-500. on the other hand, by not having L quality build, this lens is lighter than the 24-70L (1.4 lbs vs. 2.1). i have no issue carrying this lens all day but my 70-200L f2.8 is so heavy that I don’t bring out much, only when I think I really need it.Final thought: if you shoot a crop body and don’t plan to upgrade to a full frame, in my opinion (and many others’), this lens is best choice as a general purpose lens from landscape to portraits. the 70-200L f2.8 or 85 f1.8 are better portrait lenses though, due to their focal length)
10 people found this helpful
T. Tran –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Wow, couldn’t stop taking pictures with this lens.
I had been struggling between: sigma 17-50 IS, Canon 24-70, 24-105. The two Canon L lenses are not wide enough so I bought the Sigma but I was not so happy and returned you can find my review for Sigma there).I never though that I would buy the 17-55IS that is EF-S, expensive w/o a lens hood, not L lens build quality, no RED ring and now I am writing a review for it. I won’t do much comparison between this and Sigma since it’s not fair for the Sigma at much lower price but you know I have tried the Sigma so you make your own judgment.After receiving from Amazon, the first thing I tried was the zoom ring and it was disappointed and felt nervous for paying that much for the lens but after a couple shot at wide aperture then the fear has gone. I started with by battery test shots, kids’ eyes and the focus is dead on, I kept checking if I set it at F/2.8. Then after 300 shots in my sister’s wedding it becomes my new favorite. I just have the lens less than 2 months so I couldn’t comment on the dust issue( will update after one year). Here is my personal mini review for the lens, first two are equally important:- Image quality: very sharp and even at F/2.8. I rarely shot at f/2.8 with my old sigma 18-50Macro and normally I have to go to F/4.0. Color and contrast are more subjective and could be fixed with PS but I just view the shots from this lens over and over with my IPS screen. I am using LR and my default sharpness is 30, rarely go above 35 because it will be scary.- Focus: this lens focuses quick and accurate, maybe I am lucky but I’d say all my canon lenses are good. The focus ring on the Canon 17-55 travels more than the one on the Sigma 7-50hsm and ring doesn’t rotate and that could explain why the Canon focus is more accurate. My speculation that the Sigma can easily miss the target with a small overshoot. The Canon focus seems to be much faster. When I had the Sigma 17-50, I wasn’t impressed with the focus speed although it has HSM. Majority of people test focus accuracy with camera mounted on tripod but my way is to point to targets the shoot and that’s how we take pictures right?- IS: almost silence and very good. And because the 17-55 IS is long, it’s more noticeable when I have IS on.- Build quality: I wish it had the RED ring. I think the build quality is decent and much bigger than the Sigma version. The size could be a con especially with the lens hood on but I think Canon decided not to compromise the image quality for smaller size lens. Let’s wait and see if I have dusts in my lens.Well, the 3 out of 4 things that I listed above directly affect the image quality and Canon designed them right.What I don’t like about the lens: my first complaint is the zoom ring, why such an expensive lens has mediocre zoom ring? I think the lens size is related to achieving the image quality so I don’t care. Canon: please include a lens hood as you do with L lenses. I got $10 lens hood and it works fine, fits perfectly.To answer your question whether to go with $1100 lens or $600 lens? then ask yourself what are important to you then you know the answer.Final rating: 4.5 stars
2 people found this helpful
P.K. Frary –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Impressive optical quality, fast aperture & rock steady IS!
The EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS USM covers a zoom range of moderately wide to short telephoto, making it ideal for general use, e.g., travel, landscapes or portraits. It stands out from the crowd with fast F 2.8 aperture, 3-stop image stabilization and L-series level image quality. Plus, it sports excellent fit and finish, sturdy plastics and metal mount. It’s a hefty lens, mostly due to the constant F2.8 aperture and image stabilization mechanism.FOCUS & ZOOM: A ring-type Ultrasonic Motor drives an internal lens group and AF is blazing fast, silent and surefooted on my 70D. The front element doesn’t rotate or extend during focusing. FTM allows manual focus override without switching out of AF mode. The focus ring is narrow and coarse in pitch, so not ideal for video pulls but okay for normal photography. Although not a macro lens, it focuses close enough for head shots (35cm/.17x).The large zoom ring is covered with ribbed rubber and easy to grip and turn. Zoom action is damped and does not creep, but has slightly more resistance in the middle of the range. In contrast, my EF-S 15-85 3.5-5.6 IS USM is silky smooth throughout the entire zoom range. A single nested barrel extends considerably–nearly doubling in length–when racked out to 55mm.OPTICAL QUALITY: This is among the best zooms I’ve owned: wide open as it’s sharp and contrasty at all focal lengths from close focus to infinity. At F2.8 it shows slight softness around the edges, but is pin sharp in the center. The edges sharpen up nicely by stopping down. There is a small loss of contrast and sharpness at macro distances (35cm).One of the main reasons to buy this lens is for the pleasing bokeh of the F2.8 aperture. The large aperture coupled with a circular 7-blade diaphragm produces round out of focus highlights and smooth background blur.Blazing Hawaiian sunsets often result in moderate ghosting and flare, but typical high contrast night scenes with street lights or interior lamps are fairly immune from flare.IMAGE STABILIZATION: Tiny gyro sensors coupled to a CPU detect the degree and direction of camera shake and counteract this vibration by moving a compensating optical group. Subsequently, I almost always get a sharp picture, even three stops below my normal hand held shutter speed. If I brace myself or shoot a volley of shots I can get away with another stop.DUST: The vents behind the front element retaining ring suck in dust during zoom and focus operations. However, dust problems mainly come from lenses lacking UV filters. The filter prevents most dust from being draw in. I’ve always used a UV filter for protection and my EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS USM is clean after many years of use in deserts, streets, beaches and smoky bars.No lens hood included but the
Canon EW-83J Lens Hood
is available as an accessory for $45. Incidentally, the
Canon EW-83H Lens Hood for EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Lens
fits perfect, doesn’t vignette, is as handsome but priced lower.CONCLUSION: This is the big daddy royale of normal APS-C zooms. I love the range, aperture, AF speed and sharpness of this lens. The combination of 3-stop IS and fast F2.8 aperture make it ideal for available light shooting on city streets and in building interiors. I feel confident to shoot wide open in any situation and bring back sharp images. I bought this lens in 2006 and humped it from Vegas to Venice without a whimper or glitch. As of 2015, that’s 9 years of clicks!
18 people found this helpful
Stack⠀OverflowStack⠀Overflow –
5.0 out of 5 stars
f/2.8 (Low Light Capability) and Versatile Focal Lengths (For Landscape or Portrait)Make This One of the Best Walk-Around Lenses
I got this lens to replace my
18-55mm
kit lens 2 years ago and I have never looked back since. The thing I love most about this lens is its f/2.8 constant aperture (as opposed to the f/3.5-5.6 variable aperture of the kit lens).f/2.8 allows me to take my shots handheld and STILL get impressively sharp pictures (since with a wider aperture, I can crank up the shutter speed to counteract any camera shake from hand-holding the camera). I find it especially useful on my hikes where I’m snapping pictures on the go (I don’t usually bring my tripod with me on my hikes simply because it’s too cumbersome).This lens, of course, has a lot more to offer. You’re paying a premium not only for the f/2.8 constant aperture (which is the lowest f-stop on a zoom (non-prime) lens that money can buy), but for the image quality it delivers. Based on my tests, the image quality is on par with the wildly popular
EF 24-105mm f/4
lens. But I do prefer this lens over the 24-105mm because of (1) the wide 17mm focal length (which I frequently use for landscape shots) and (2) the f/2.8 aperture (which is perfect for handheld shots and for low light conditions).Another advantage this lens has over the kit lens is it uses Internal Focus (IF), which is a useful feature if you’re using a polarizing filter (AKA a circular polarizer). With Internal Focus, the barrel on which the polarizer is affixed doesn’t turn and throw filter out of adjustment, so it saves you from having to readjust the filter after the subject is brought into focus.This lens uses Canon’s Ultra-low Dispersion (UD) glass (reserved only for Canon’s best lenses), which reduces or eliminates Chromatic aberration (colored fringes around a brightly lit subject) and it has an ultrasonic motor (USM) for fast focusing.To wrap up this review, I would like to comment on a couple of “problems” that many “L”-lens snobs have raised about this lens ad nauseam. (1) No Weather Sealing. Some people have mentioned that the lack of weather sealing causes dust to get inside the lens. This was one of my concerns when I was deciding whether to get this lens. But speaking from personal experience (now that I’ve had this lens for 2 years), I’ve never found the lack of whether sealing or dust to be a problem (and I don’t exactly baby this lens).(2) Cheap Build Quality. It really boggles my mind when someone says this lens “feels” cheap. How exactly does this lens “feel” cheap? No, the build quality of this lens is NOT cheap, and it does NOT feel cheap.—The 17-55mm f/2.8, is one of the best (if not the best) low-light walk-around lenses you can buy. Its 17-55mm focal length range makes it versatile for use in either landscape or portrait photography. It may be pricey, but it’s the opinion of this reviewer that it’s worth every last penny you pay for it.[Update 2012-07-25]A word about the dust issue: If you are worried about dust getting into the lens, it’s been suggested that a protective (UV) filter is an effective barrier to dust (it’s been purported that dust enters into the lens through cracks in the front element). I have been using a UV filter since I acquired this lens brand new and the fact that I’ve never had a problem with dust seems to lend credence to the above claim.
20 people found this helpful
Jeff H. –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Everything I hoped it would be
Standard for all my reviews: When reviewing products, I always remain objective and honest about the product or service. I always review with information that I feel others would like to know about the product as I always assume what I’m writing will influence for or against the purchase. I always try to go above and beyond surface characteristics and input into quality, value and application. Most importantly, I will always end the review with an answer as to whether I’d purchase the product again which I believe is the most critical question pertaining to the item. To manufacturers: Want me to review your items, just let me know!We had planned a 3.5 week trip to Iceland and needed to refresh some of my camera gear. I upgraded to a Canon R5 and had to replace my old Tamron 17-55 lens due to incompatibility. I immediately knew a new Canon 17-55 was in my future. I’m primarily a landscape photographer with some wildlife. In Iceland, I knew it would be 95% landscape photography. The Canon glass did not disappoint.I’ve never put a ton of stock in maximizing the quality of my wide angle glass, instead spending the money for other focal lengths. I can tell now that was a mistake in thinking.My old Tamron glass had functioned relatively well but I hadn’t known how much I was missing when changing to the Canon lens. The sharpness and number of ‘keepers’ was measurably higher. Normally I wouldn’t expect this with a short length lens to that of a telephoto but the Canon glass was so sharp and dependable with most every shot. Detail sharpness at all focal lengths were fantastic. In short, I exclaimed multiple times to my wife over the 3.5 weeks that “this lens has changed my experience and expectations tremendously.” I’m still in the post processing phase of the photos I took but even without ANY processing, I’ve been impressed with photos.So happy I upgraded to the this Canon 17-55 and wish I had done it sooner. You’ll be happy with this purchase if you’re ready to upgrade.
NotoriousSEG –
5.0 out of 5 stars
You may not realize it yet, but you NEED this lens.
Let me start out by saying that I am NOT a professional photographer by any means. I am a guy who is into photography, who has a penchant for gadgetry and who appreciates quality. This lens fulfills my desires on all three of those levels. You won’t hear me talking about “creamy bokeh” or any of the other esoteric stuff that some reviewers rely on for filler material. This is a regular guy’s review for other people in my same boat.OK first of all, this thing is expensive. I paid $980 from Amazon and kicked and screamed the whole way. I had agonized over literally 1000 reviews (most of which were very favorable) before making the final decision. I had pros and semi-pros advising me, and in some cases insisting that I buy this thing. I don’t know though—a thousand bucks? For a hunk of glass? I felt my gag reflex kicking in a little as I broke out into a cold sweat. Oh sure I wanted it, but did I need it? As most of you know, need is a relative thing, and I can usually rationalize myself into “needing” something with fairly little effort. Usually. A thousand bucks though? The one thing that finally pushed me over the edge was that I joined a couple photography forums and noticed that these lenses were selling on the used market for around $900–and not only that, but when one did pop up for sale, it usually only lasted about a day before it was SOLD! So, I guess I didn’t really have that much to lose.When it came (3 short days later), I could swear I heard a Heavenly choir singing and saw a little divine glow eminating as I unboxed that ravishing beauty. And there she was, the culmination of about 60 hours of research, 30 emails, 8 phone calls and me parting with almost 1000 of my very favorite hard-earned dollars. Would she be worth it? Only time would tell.For a few minutes, all I could do was stare. It is a good looking piece of equipment and I’ll tell you this too, it’s pretty big. Like a soup can. And not one of those condensed soup cans either–more like a “Chunky” can. I’m talkin’ BIG. Despite its size and what feels like a much more substantial build quality than most Canon L-lens disciples would have you believe, it is not unweildy or particularly problematic in the weight department. I have it slapped on the front of a Canon 50d and could easily carry it around all day long if need dictated.Back when I was agonizing over this decision and balking about the price, I was trying to rationalize my way into another (less expensive) lens. I looked at the Canon 15-85mm, but it was MUCH slower than this one, didn’t have any reviews to speak of and still cost somewhere in the $8-hundo neighborhood. I also thought I could just go with the 17-55mm kit lens and really save myself a whole bunch of money in the process. I mean afterall it’s the same focal range, right? Right…sort of. I’m here to tell you right now in as plain a language as I can muster, those two lenses do not even reside on the same planet as one another! It’s about like substituting a Honda Civic for a Ferrari—sure they both get you from A to B, but that’s where it ends. A Ferrari does things that a Civic can only dream about and a Ferrari instills a certain pride of ownership–particularly in someone who appreciates the fine quality of the marque. A Ferrari can go 200mph, and while that is not always necessary, or even desired, it is still an option. This lens is a Ferrari.The proof is in the pudding (or is it putting? I can never remember) and this baby delivers. On my first day of shooting I was just walking around taking pictures of anything and everything that was in front of me at the time. I wanted to see if f2.8 is really worth all the hubbub and drool from the Photophiles. Trust me, it is. I captured a shot of my dining room in almost total darkness with only the light from an outside street lamp shining through the window–and the pic turned out GREAT! I later got a picture of my kids outside at night with NO FLASH that I would have never been able to capture with one of those other lenses. I’ve had this lens for about a week now and in that time have shot almost 600 pictures. Exactly ONE of those pictures incorporated the flash–the rest were shot in natural light. The shot with the flash was just an experiment and probably would have looked better without it anyway. I even shot about 150 of those pictures at my children’s Christmas program–again–no flash and every picture turned out perfect. Awesome!When I saw the quality of the images I was getting with this thing set at a WIDE OPEN aperture (traditionally yielding softer images) I almost cried. I mean I’ve had good gear in the past, but this lens takes the cake. Speaking as a person who is not affiliated with Canon in any way , shape or form AND has absolutely nothing to gain by giving a review, I can tell you without reservation that this lens gives me joy. Joy! I paid $980 for about $100,000 worth of joy and in turn have captured memories that are priceless to me. I’d say all in all, that’s a pretty good deal.If you are reading this review, you may be in the same position I was in about 2 weeks ago. You like the lens, but aren’t quite convinced yet. Do I spend? Do I wait? Do I settle? Believe me, I know a grand isn’t easy to come by these days and I also know you are being more careful how you spend, but I have had very few occasions in my life in which an “investment” like this has paid me back so much in so short a time. This lens will bring you joy too, and in this day and age that is even harder to come by than mere money. Buy this lens–you can thank me later.
137 people found this helpful
Devyn B –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Gotta love Canon
Just what I needed! For reference, I would say my photography skill is intermediate. My camera has a cropped sensor (80d), so for portraits my nifty fifty takes beautiful photos, but it functions more like an 85 and I have to back waaaaay up for anything other than a headshot. This though!! DO IT!!! It has a nice weight to it. It’s just wide angled enough. I’m still getting used to the focusing ring being behind the zooming mechanism. 2.8 gives me juuust enough background blur. So far, seems like a very nice lens. A great variety of things you can capture; would be a great event lens, family photography, and a great walk around. It’s PERFECT for a squirmy infant! My sharpest photos of my child have been taken with this lens. And the prime shipping on top of all this!!!
One person found this helpful
RP –
3.0 out of 5 stars
Lots of wide-open vignetting
There’s a massive amount of hype around this lens, but my experience with it left a lot to be desired. I have a Canon 60d and so far my lens arsenal (if you could call it that!) consists of a Canon 50mm f1.4, the 18-135mm kit lens, and a Rokinon 35mm f1.4. I shoot in a lot of low light situations, so I purchased the EF-S 17-55mm based on all the positive reviews. (I’ve been looking for a high-quality, “fast” zoom — mainly for indoor DSLR video.)I tested the lens in a variety of real-world and “pixel peeping” ways — indoors and outside. What ultimately made me return it was the significant vignetting at f2.8. There were probably 2-3 f stops of light falloff in the corners, and to me, I purchased this lens to operate wide open.I returned the 17-55 lens to Amazon. It was an easy return, so that was nice. Bottom line is… I don’t think I had a bad copy. Sharpness was good — maybe a bit better than my 18-135mm kit lens. It wasn’t as sharp as my primes. The zoom ring had a bit of a snag around 20mm, which I thought odd … but that alone wasn’t enough to make me return it.Ultimately, the light falloff at f2.8 was just too extreme for what I expected from a $1k Canon lens. Based on the Photozone.de and other site reviews, vignetting is a design issue with all fast zooms. The Canon fares pretty badly compared to the competition, so for the money I just couldn’t justify keeping it. You can correct vignetting in Photoshop Raw, and the 60d has a function that brightens the corners a bit in-camera. But to me, those are just workarounds for the physics and design of this lens.I may try the Canon 16-35mm f2.8, which is designed for a full-frame camera like a 5d. Perhaps any vignetting issues in that design will fall outside the crop sensor of my 60d.
7 people found this helpful
Amazon Customer –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Tack sharp
Don’t worry, this lens is TACK sharp. I have the 70-200 IS F4 L and the 100-400L zoom as well. This is sharper than either of those lenses. It is PLENTY wide on a 7D. It has good bokeh, contrast, and saturation. It is fast. I’m more than satisfied with its performance.HOWEVER, it is NOT an L lens. It feels sturdy but it is not L-sturdy. There is lens creep (at least with my copy) which can get annoying when carrying the camera pointing down at my side. The focus ring on my copy feels like there are tiny sand particles in it (it has made a few trips to the beech). It has a “gritty” feel when I rotate it. It has not affected performance at all, but it just doesn’t feel good. I personally have not had any problems with dust getting in the lens…yet.For a 7D, I think this is the best bet for a wide angle zoom lens. It will allow you to get photos including the entire room indoors. It is fast at f2.8. It really is razor sharp. Best for use in landscape photography and especially with taking pics of children indoors in low light situations. It’s a good walk about lens on a 1.6 crop factor camera. It’s not an L series. I wish for the cost, it had a bit better build quality. The price was not much different than my 70-200 4L, after all.I can emphatically recommend this lens and it’s not a joke that it provides L quality photos but it’s definitely not L quality build.
7 people found this helpful
Proud Nana of 2 –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Canon 17-55 f2.8 WOW!
Received my lens and I am a “Happy Customer” !! Processed and shipped quickly, great price to! Keep it on my Canon 70D so I can capture all the photog moments, great walk around, anytime lens. Great for portraits and Landscapes and pretty much everything in between. I wanted a lens for traveling that would work for most photo taking situations and this is it. I also needed a lens to take pics of quilts (I ‘m a quilter) at quilt shows and it does the job, perfectly! The bonus is it is great for video and photos in church! My biggest challenge has been church lighting resulting in yellow/orange pictures/video in the church setting, NO More! My baby dedication videos are clear and actual colors, celebration still photos well, no more putting every photo through photo shop!! I know my Canon 70D contributes greatly to my perfect looking videos and photos so I put the 17-55 2.8f on my T1i and again great videos/photos. If you can only own one lens this is it!! All my other lenses are Canon “L” series either wide angel or telephoto and cost big bucks The Canon 17-55f 2.8 is a great lens and affordable for the amateur parents, aunt, and grandparents wanting to capture the memories of their loved ones. Not even a year ago this is the price you would pay for the exact lens used/refurbished not brand new.
2 people found this helpful
Dave Libertyville –
5.0 out of 5 stars
In optics, you get what you pay for
Very happy with this lens. The basic lenses included with my Canon T4i were fine; good, basic functionality. But as I have gotten more serious about shooting my son’s indoor volleyball matches, I realized I needed a more light sensitive lens. This one isn’t cheap, but the additional couple of f stops is huge when shooting fast moving subjects indoors.I’m what you’d call a serious hobbyist, when it comes to photography, by no means a professional. But here’s what I’ve learned in my 5+ years of digital SLR photography: put your money in the optics. A basic digitial SLR will work fine for you; you don’t need a $300 tripod when a $40 will suffice; don’t put money on fancy camera bags, or any number of other accessories that are available. Put your money in the optics. It’s not fun to plunk down this kind of money, but an expensive high quality lens will do more for your photography than most anything else out there. Don’t get caught up in the silly megapixel game; camera makers will try and convince you that your current SLR is inadequate. Put your money in the lens; you’ll get the best return on your investment, and if the day comes when you want to sell it, a good lens holds its value quite well. The SLR body, on the other hand, will depreciate rapidly.
12 people found this helpful
Ruined –
4.0 out of 5 stars
Unique blend of f/2.8 aperture and IS might make your full frame friends jealous in this focal length!
This lens is unique as it supports a fast f/2.8 aperture, has 3-stop image stabilization, and it covers a similar angle of view to the 24-70mm on full frame cameras. While the 24-70mm II is sharper, it lacks image stabilization and costs $1500 more! Many with full frame cameras will point to the 24-105mm IS, but that is F/4.So for an APS-C camera, this is one of the best lenses available in its zoom range. While it is not as sharp as the 24-70II L and does not have the extra range of the 24-105, it does offer both f/2.8 and IS which is not available elsewhere in the Canon lineup in this zoom range.The only disadvantage I found to this lens was that despite otherwise high build quality the zooming action is not entirely uniform in terms of tension, there is significantly more tension in the middle of the zoom range than the ends. This makes zooming in and out feel a bit awkward, though it is easy to get used to. Autofocus is super snappy with Ring USM.In conclusion, if you have an APS-C camera like a Rebel or EOS 60D/70D, this lens should be one of your first priorities to get. Highly recommended.
4 people found this helpful
Drosophila Melanogaster –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Great bang for the buck, even at this price!
I just bought my first digital SLR a few weeks ago and chose this as my “walk-around” lens. It took me only one day of shooting to get over the sticker shock: The casual test shots I took were absolutely tack-sharp, and the lens was extremely responsive with both a Canon 40D EOS and a Rebel XSi. I was drawn to this lens for its focal range, since I shoot mostly landscapes, architecture, and portraits. It serves beautifully for all three — and still lets you get close enough to your subjects to take some macro-like shots. As you’d expect, it performs well in low-light situations, and the nice, wide aperture blurs the background beautifully in portraits. I’ve been pleasantly surprised at this lens’ excellent depth of field, too, and by its superb responsiveness for “action” shots. The image stabilization works well, though at the smallest apertures (f/22) it may still not be enough to compensate for camera shake, depending on the shutter speed. The only complaint I have (and this is just a minor annoyance) is that the barrel sticks a bit when zooming between the 28 mm and 20 mm focal ranges. At first I thought my lens was defective, but I tried a couple of other lenses at the local shop and found the all behaved the same. It’s loosened up a bit with use, so I hold out hope this’ll disappear over time. All told, I’m extremely happy with my purchase and would buy this lens again in a heartbeat.
4 people found this helpful
skiwildcat7 –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent All Around Lens for Crop Cameras
I’ve had this lens for about a month now and am very satisfied. It is quite an amazing lens! It is also really big on a Canon T2i but not so big that it looks ridiculous. The image stabilization on this lens is absurdly good. I can take handheld pictures at 1/4 sec exposure and they are not blurry! So yeah, if you take low light pics, great lens to get. I haven’t had a dust problem but I’ve kept a Hoya filter on there since I bought it as others recommended. I did get some moisture in the lens when I was taking pics of skier pros at Whistler one rainy night (which came out pretty good by the way) but I just let the lens dry overnight and the moisture disappeared and my pictures are fine. The images are sharp, clear and full of color (I’m using this with a T2i). Is the lens a little heavy? Yeah sure, especially compared to the kit lens, but the image quality is way better. Plus I’m taking night pics I could never take with my kit lens and I have the ability to have a shallower depth of field. But the weight of the lens is really not a problem, I skied with this thing in my Case Logic shoulder bag all day long and it was fine. If you’re on the edge about buying this lens, do it! You won’t regret it. Highly recommended, especially as an upgrade to the kit lens.
One person found this helpful
Amazon_VerifiedAmazon_Verified –
5.0 out of 5 stars
1st Sweet Lens, and it does wonders!
Bought this to pair with my t2i. Its a beast on this body. I consider myself an amateur. I looked around and narrowed it down to this lens or the popular Canon f/2.8 24-70mm L lens. For me, even on a crop body, i wanted a wider angle, and the fact that IS was available, it made it a solid choice. I am very pleased with the results of this lens, and it takes VERY BEAUTIFUL Photographs. I have been using it very often shooting over 60k shots so far, in less than a year. The lens is pricy, but the capabilities will blow you away. I paired an aftermarket hood and have a filter on at all times to protect potential dust that may leach into the lens. No luck there. I do see a dust spec inside the lens behind the glass, very bummed about that. Doesn’t look like it has affected my photos though. I don’t regret buying this piece of equipment, and would highly recommend this item. Now its time to wait for a new flagship APS-C Body 7D (or 70D!). THIS LENS IS SUPER SHARP! I placed a few photos up.PROSIS, Fast and silent focusing. Fair Wide angle, great walk around lens. SUPER SHARP PHOTOS.CONSPrice, found dust inside lens, no scalability for FULL FRAME bodies. Not really weatherproof. Sucker has a good weight.
3 people found this helpful
Y. AlemadiY. Alemadi –
5.0 out of 5 stars
Perfect Lens for a 1.6 crop.
I purchased the 17-55mm about a month ago, and was very happy with the quality of images the lens produced. I like night photography and the f/2.8 helped alot, even when shooting without using a tripod.There are alot of good things to say about this lens, i know alot of people are in love with it, maybe because it’s one of few lenses that Canon produce for the 1.6 crop cameras?Well on day 2 of having the lens, i was shooting outdoor and noticed a few dust particals behind the front glass. It was not fun to see dust from the 2nd day of getting the lens, specially after paying that amount of cash. I kept using the lens for almost 3 weeks, and everytime i shoot outdoor i noticed more and more DUST particals in my lens. So i decided to return the lens for a full refund. Amazon did the refund very fast, it just took like 2-3 days to get the money back. Thanks Amazon for a great and honest support. Well after getting the money back, i placed an order for 2 other lenses from Amazon. EF 17-40mm f/4L USM and EF 50mm f1.4 USM. I just could not stand the dust issue, and i have read that they won’t effect the image quality or the foucs. I also have friends that have been using this lens for a while now, without having the DUST issue. I guess i was not lucky.Regards,
7 people found this helpful