EF 17-40L f4.0 vs EF-s 17-55 f2.8 IS?

If you're a user of a Canon DSLR, then welcome. This is your home.

Moderators: gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is. Please also check the portal page for more information on this.

EF 17-40L f4.0 vs EF-s 17-55 f2.8 IS?

Postby jdear on Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:39 pm

Anybody have the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS? Im considering it over the 17-40 as its faster, and has the extra bit of reach to fill the gap between it and 70-200.

Ive only really heard good things about it, except that its not FF compatible of course!

Many thanks,

J
User avatar
jdear
Senior Member
 
Posts: 960
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:34 am
Location: Shellharbour, NSW

Postby DJXtreme on Thu Aug 17, 2006 12:41 am

i too have heard only good things about the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS and have no doubt if you got it you would be happy with it. i guess you need to consider the likelihood that you will switch to a full frame camera down the track if so theres the possibility that its not worth you buying ef-s lenses now.
Cheers,

Will
DJXtreme
Member
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:03 pm
Location: Gawler, South Australia

Postby petal666 on Thu Aug 17, 2006 6:59 am

DJXtreme wrote:i guess you need to consider the likelihood that you will switch to a full frame camera down the track if so theres the possibility that its not worth you buying ef-s lenses now.
Why not? Lenses have good resale value, and if you manage to buy 2nd hand you won't loose too much money at all.
Canon 1D III
User avatar
petal666
Senior Member
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 7:17 am
Location: Toowng QLD - 1D III

Postby moz on Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:07 pm

I had a play with it at PIW and was fairly impressed. Compared to the Sigma 18-50/2.8 that I have it is a little better all round, has IS and focuses a little faster. Of course it's twice the size and twice the price but it does have IS. It's not brilliant for what I do - a lot of one handed shooting, often while riding my bike - and since I expect to be shooting full frame within a year or so, the idea that my midrange zoom wouldn't work did weigh on me a bit.

I wouldn't sell my Sigma to buy one (I bought the 24-70/2.8 instead), but it is a very nice lens. The drop in value of the Sigma second hand meant that I'd be paying over $1000 for a relatively minor upgrade. I'd rather put that towards the 5D and get 24/2.8 instead of 27/2.8.
http://www.moz.net.nz
have bicycle, will go to Critical Mass
User avatar
moz
Senior Member
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 6:50 pm
Location: Coburg, Melbun.

The Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS EF-s USM lense

Postby zafra52 on Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:28 pm

Jdear, considering that the best price I can find for a new Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS EF-s USM Lens is about $1,649.00 it should better be a really good lens. That's the one I would like to swap for the 18 -55mm kit that came with my camera, but it is too expensive and having just bought a 28 - 135mm lens it will have to wait for a very long time before I can afford it! However, if you go ahead and get it let me know or better still show us the results. Cheers!
User avatar
zafra52
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4827
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:22 pm
Location: Brisbane

Postby dreams on Tue Aug 22, 2006 4:59 pm

For me personally with that amount to play with, id consider the 24-70F2.8
afterall its an L series lens bro :D
dreams
Member
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 2:20 pm
Location: Adelaide

Postby jdear on Tue Aug 22, 2006 6:04 pm

I have the siggy 24-70 and Im finding it just not wide enough on the 30d, Its also quite soft compared to my EF-S 60mm and just doesnt give the same colour / contrast.

I could just add a 10-22 say in there, (- 24-70, 70-200) but I dont want to change lenses too much when Id be shooting a wedding.

might have to see if I can have a play with one - 17-55 and make an executive decision... Although I have to wait until the baby bonus comes in, in oct! :)

J
User avatar
jdear
Senior Member
 
Posts: 960
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:34 am
Location: Shellharbour, NSW

Portraits

Postby zafra52 on Tue Aug 22, 2006 6:51 pm

Jdear, I guess it all depends on how sharp you want your images and how close you need to put the camera from the subject. In my humble opinion, the sharper the original image the better because you can always use your favourite software package the create the diffusion effect.
If you have not read it yet you might want to have a look at this thread Canon Potrait Lens which one? Where different members discussed the merits and preferences of their Canon lenses and in some cases even provided sample pictures. One of them is on weddings. I learned heaps from them.
User avatar
zafra52
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4827
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:22 pm
Location: Brisbane

Postby Sheila Smart on Fri Sep 15, 2006 9:26 pm

IMHO, its a lot of money to pay for a lens with a limited range of compatible bodies :( Before I bought my 5D, I had debated trading my superb 17-40 for a EF-s 10-20 but a little voice kept saying "don't buy it because when you go full frame......" I am glad I didn't as I love my 17-40 L on the full frame 5D.

Cheers
Sheila
Sheila Smart
Canon 5D and various Ls
Black and White Spider Award 2005 - Photographer of the Year - amateur
On-line Gallery here
Sheila Smart
Member
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 10:20 am
Location: Avalon Beach, NSW


Return to Canon Corral