Which lens?

[zafra52]

I am thinking of replacing in the near future the 18-55 Canon lens kit that came with my 30D with a better one, but which would you recommend?

Canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM SPECIAL PRICE $1665
Canon 17-40mm f4 L USM Lens SUPER SPECIAL $1056
Canon 17-85mm f4.5-5.6 IS USM Lens SUPER SPECIAL $814

These prices come from camerasdirect.com.au since I have not seen anything like on our website.

I am interesting in a reasonable wide lense for I already have a Canon 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 USM IS Lens and a Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6 APO DG Macro.

[Kris]

17-40 , great WA lense. 17-55 great walk about

Id say go the 17-55, you'll have fun with it and its a very highly regarded lense for the Canon crop cameras

[bwhinnen]

Go with the 17-55 f2.8 IS USM. It may not be an L class but it is that close it is not funny. Images from it are fantastic. My business partner just picked one up and it is brilliant! Almost comparable to the old 17-35 f2.8L USM or newer 16-35 f2.8L USM...

Steer clear of the 17-85 IS USM, the max aperture is not worth it in my opinion and you'd be better suited to the f2.8 or f4.

The 17-40 is a beautiful lens as well, but IQ of the 17-55 is almost there, plus you get the extra stop and IS to boot, and it does help even with such a wide lens!

Of course that is if you have the spare cash, if you have to have a wide lens now then take the 17-40 f4L USM as it is worth the extra $250odd over the 17-85...

Cheers
Brett

Edit: Also remember if you are going to go FF anytime soon the 17-55 is an EF-S mount so you cannot use it with any of the FF models!

[moz]

I agree that the 17-85 is not worth it.

With your current lenses either of the other two is a significant step up. If you don't want the f/2.8 wide angle then the 17-40 is an astonishing lens, and since it's full frame you can keep it for a while too. The 17-55 is stabilised and f/2.8, but more expensive and not full frame. But then, you might be intending to keep the camera for a decade or two.

The other think I'd suggest is looking at the wee Sigma 18-50/2.8 (not the f/3.5 version). It's small, cheap and not full frame, but it works well and it's nice and light. I have both that and a 24-70/2.8, and the bigger lens is huge and very heavy in comparison - it's hard to shoot one handed with the 24-70 on the camera. The 17-55 is slightly smaller than the 24-70 but not a huge amount as I recall from using it briefly at PIW.

It depends a lot on what you shoot - for gigs the 17-40 is a bit of a joke, f/4 is way too slow for most shots (f/1.4 is pushing it some days), likewise for shooting small children indoors (a shotgun is better for that). But for landscapes and bright lights the 17-40 is hard to beat - it's very sharp and does not vignette noticeably on a crop camera. I'd like one, but it seems a bit redundant as I already have 12-24, 18-50 and 24-70 lenses

Stabilisation and f/2.8 make the 17-55 much better for low light or shaky hands. It's pretty new so it's probably a step up on the older lenses in terms of quality, but I really don't know, I haven't been following the reviews of it.

[gstark]

And just because a lens does not currently appear in the price list here doesn't mean that we cannot help you get it.

I can certainly ask Poon for prices on each of those three items. The worst that can happen is that he says he cannot supply them.

OTOH, the price differential - see the list of bargains - of the 30D and 30D with the 17-85 suggests a price for the lens that would save you well over a hundred (maybe closer to two hundred?) of your hard-earned.

That's one reason that we have a link on the front and bargains pages for enquires, I guess.

[petal666]

Ths biggest issue with the 17-55 is that it is EF-S which mean it can't be used on full frame cameras. While that isn't an issue for me or most other people you may end up with a full frame camera some day and the lens will be useless. But do you want to live in the future or now.

[zafra52]

A big thankyou to all of you for your help and prompt reply. I guess what I want the lens for is to take landscapes and some portrait and have it as a substitute for what I already have, but of better quality. I guess I want to keep my 30D for some time and learn to use it well for it is not even a year old and with all the lenses and gadgets it would be expensive to change it for a full frame. According to your advice, it iseems the clear winner is the 17-55, but according to my best price is about AUD500 more than the 17 -40, which is full frame but has not IS.
Now, Gary, as you so kindly offerred could you ask Poon what would be a member price for the 17-55 in AUD + package, postage, and tax?

[gstark]

Now, Gary, as you so kindly offerred could you ask Poon what would be a member price for the 17-55 in AUD + package, postage, and tax?

I shall.

Our prices are always in AUD, and always include packing and delivery to your door.

GST is never included though, because Poon doesn;t charge it, and that's an impost that can only be charged by the government. You should always factor this into any costings that you make, but the reality is that it is rarely charged.

[zafra52]

Thank you Gary

[jdear]

If you were in Sydney, Id let you borrow my 17-55 IS.
Ive been using it for weddings etc, and it gives great results! Very sharp, great contrast, good colour and very little distortion.

Im very happy with it and only see it being replaced if I go FF.

Jonathan

[zafra52]

Thank you Jonathan. Obviously you are quite happy with it and it gives you good results, which is the main thing for after all is not a cheap lens. I guess when I got into this slr camera business I did not fully realised how expensive the gear was going to be.

[gstark]

We have pricing ...

Canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM DSLRUsers Price $1250
Canon 17-40mm f4 L USM Lens DSLRUsers Price $945
Canon 17-85mm f4.5-5.6 IS USM Lens DSLRUsers Price $725

[MATT]

We have pricing ...

Canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM DSLRUsers Price $1250
Canon 17-40mm f4 L USM Lens DSLRUsers Price $945
Canon 17-85mm f4.5-5.6 IS USM Lens DSLRUsers Price $725

He's got to be happy with those prices!!!!

[jdear]

My only gripes with the 17-55 EF-S is that it attracts dust behind the front element - i.e. inside the lense.

This is also characteristic of other EF-S lenses apparently - talking to another wedding photog and his 17-85 had also dust inside the lense.


This would be because it doesn't have weather sealing like the L series (17-40 is an L series)

Also a hood for the EF-S series lenses are not usually included, and can cost up an additional $100 each. (L series include hoods)

J

[zafra52]

Thanks Gary

I am so happy that I will order one right now

Regards

Manuel