DSLRUsers.com

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

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.

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.

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.

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!

For me personally with that amount to play with, id consider the 24-70F2.8
afterall its an L series lens bro

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

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.

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