Need one more reason for the EF-S 17-55mm
Okay, I give! You guys have me talked in to buying a 17-55 and I didn't even know I wanted one:) Actually, it's mostly Jan's fault and John helped seal the deal. I've been trying to get a shot of a certain waterfall framed up portrait style. The problem I found now is my 28-75mm Tamron won't open up enough on my 1.6 crop to get everything. I've only got a couple questions first before I pull the trigger. I know it's plastic (which sucks for the ten hundred dollars it costs) and not sealed as other more expensive ones are, but will it do okay in terms of a mist being blown toward the front of the lens? I know about the vent holes and will prolly put a filter on the front anyway. I don't plan on dunkin' it in the pool. I wasn't for sure how much moisture is bad for it and where it would leak into from.
The other is about the EF-S part. I seriously doubt buying a FF in the next two years, although when I do, this will be useless to a point. Should I instead buy a used 5D (about the same price) which would make my 28-75mm closer to a 17mm andthat gives mea back-up camera? The only reason I bring up fullframe is I'm trying to also take pictures of kitchens that usually only have windows as a light source. My thinking is bigger sensor=more light at a usable ISO. I'm guessing my newer 7D will be as good as an older 5D and that I should just grow a pair and press the BUY button. Anything I'm forgetting...other than where to send neuroanatomist's commission check?
I almost forgot, why do they give full frame values to EF-S lenses? They can't be used on them, and people who buy them usuallyput them on 1.6 crop bodies. Just thinking.
Re: Need one more reason for the EF-S 17-55mm
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
will it do okay in terms of a mist being blown toward the front of the lens?
Yes, it will. I keep a UV filter on it (B+W MRC UV, like all my lenses). I've had wind-spray hit me and the camera with the 17-55mm on it, no ill effects. I haven't ever taken the 7D + EF-S 17-55mm out in the rain, though. In fact, I just bought anEF 24-105mm f/4<span style="color: red;"]LIS USM specifically to use as a 'walkaround' lens outdoors and on rainy days. Not trying to talk you out of it, but if you absolutely require weather-sealing, the EF 17-40mm f/4L is just as wide, weather sealed, and for landscapes you probably won't ever need f/2.8 or IS. But IMO, the EF-S 17-55mm is a far more useful lens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
My thinking is bigger sensor=more light at a usable ISO. I'm guessing my newer 7D will be as good as an older 5D
A 5D MkII will easily best the 7D in low light/high ISO performance. But the 7D will be as good or better than the original 5D in that department.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
why do they give full frame values to EF-S lenses?
Because cropping is cropping. An EF-S lens has the stated focal length, it just projects a smaller image circle, in alignment with the cropped FOV of the 1.6x sensor. Imagine how confusing it would be if they did alter the focal lengths printed on EF-S lenses to account for the crop - instead of universally applying a factor, you'd have to take lens type into account, so some would need the calculation, others would not. Plus, it applies to aperture (in terms of DoF) as well. Canon recently released the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 lens. Would you pay $700 for a lens marketed as a 24-136mm f/5.6-9IS lens?!? Even if they only 'corrected' the focal length, as 'Joe consumer' would you pay $700 fora 24-136mmf/3.5-5.6IS lens or buy thecheaper 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens, apparently giving up only 5mm in total zoom range and saving yourself $300 in the process? Complete confusion would result!
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
where to send neuroanatomist's commission check
Send me a PM and I'll give you the address. [6]
Seriously, enjoy your new lens!
--John
Re: Need one more reason for the EF-S 17-55mm
Hey there,
Buying a 17-55 2.8 will be a betterchoice than getting a 5D, IMHO. Do no take me wrong, 5D is a great camera, but besides being a full frame body it is inferior to your 7D in every other aspect. Yes, the 17-55 is made of plastic, but it is high quality plastic. I have had mine for 4 years now, used it with XTi, XSi, 40D, 50D and now with 7D, and it is still my most used ES-F zoom. No issues with dust or moisture, although I am careful about my equipment in general (if you take care of it, it will take care of you [;)] ). It is worth every of its 100,000 pennies!
Take care,
Pete
Re: Need one more reason for the EF-S 17-55mm
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
Anything I'm forgetting...?
Well, giving this some more thought, how happy are you with the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8? I ask because there wouldn't seem much point in keeping that lens if you get the EF-S 17-55mm - the 17-55mm has same f/2.8 aperture, has IS, and you won't miss 20mm on the long end, especially since you have the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, but 11mm on the wide end is a significant difference.
So IMO, if you get the EF-S 17-55mm you should be looking to sell the Tamron 28-75mm. But, if you're happy with the Tamron as a general purpose zoom, have you considered theEF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Lens? It's a true UWA lens for 1.6x bodies (16-35mm FF equivalent). Build and IQ are excellent (on par with the 17-55mm, although it's a much lighter lens).
Having said that, I think the best two-lens combination for a 1.6x body is the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS + 70-200mm f/2.8 IS.
--John
Re: Need one more reason for the EF-S 17-55mm
Speaking of pennies, I need three more to make it happen..so close, and John, did you just try to talk me out of the 17-55mm, or is this a sales trick:) You guys are a hoot! Thanks John and Pete for the help. 7D trumps the 5D and I figure the only place my money is safe is in either gold or Canon lenses, and they haven't come out with a mount for the gold bars yet, so Canon it is.
If I click on one of Bryan's links at the top, he gets a little kickback, correct, or do I need to actually go to the page where he's got the lens and click the BUY button? So long as the 17-55 can handle a little mist, I think I'm okay. I'll also be buying the Eye1 which I should have bought months ago. It's still a good one isn't it?
I forgot all about the F/5.6-9 conversion stuff. I read the post about the digicam and it's "2.8". Just when I almost had a grasp on reality, I choose the red pill;)
You'll have to forgive my stupidity neuroanatomist, but what's a PM? I know it sucks when you have to explain your jokes. My sister is a blonde. Since I'm asking stupid questions, how can you reply to just a sentence from a poster like you folks do?
Last couple questions I almost forgot: Do I need the hood? If so, is the off brand okay?...and I forgot the other one already. I'm blonde too.
Re: Need one more reason for the EF-S 17-55mm
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
If I click on one of Bryan's links at the top, he gets a little kickback, correct, or do I need to actually go to the page where he's got the lens and click the BUY button?
Correct. I'm not sure if one click on an ad above applies to the whole shopping session or not. To be sure I'm giving the site all the support I can, I just go to the individual review of the lens/etc., and click one of the shopping links at the bottom for each, then add it to my cart at the retailer (Amazon or B&H, usually).
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
what's a PM?
PM = private message. They're 'conversations' here - you can click on someone's name to reach their profile, then click the Start a Conversation link at the top left. Note that if you want to let anyone start a conversation with you (as opposed to people you've added as 'friends'), you need to Edit your profile, go into Site Options, scroll down and set Allow Conversations From to All Users.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
how can you reply to just a sentence from a poster like you folks do?
In your reply, select the portion of the text in the original post (in the gray box) that you want to quote, then click the Quote 'button' at the bottom. If you don't select any text, the whole post is quoted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
Do I need the hood? If so, is the off brand okay?
I recommend using a hood with all lenses, all the time - it reduces the chance of flare, and offers some protection for your lens. You're best off getting a hood specifically designed for the lens (versus a 'generic' round rubber hood). But, the differences between Canon brand hoods and 3rd party brands aren't that significant. I suppose it depends on the brand - the Canon hoods all have flocking on the inside (reduces reflections), and 3rd party hoods might not. Some reviews note that 3rd party hoods don't attach/detach as smoothly (but some Canon hoods, even the hoods included with L lenses, have the same problem). So, I'd say definitely get a hood designed for the lens, but it's ok to save a few pennies by getting a 3rd party version.
Re: Need one more reason for the EF-S 17-55mm
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
The only reason I bring up fullframe is I'm trying to also take pictures of kitchens that usually only have windows as a light source. My thinking is bigger sensor=more light at a usable ISO. I'm guessing my newer 7D will be as good as an older 5D and that I should just grow a pair and press the BUY button
Your 7D will be fine! In my opinion a tripod or good IS makes a lot more difference for you then a 5D would make [;)]
To be honest I think you won't use your 28-75 anymore when buying the 17-55. I always thought I didn't need the IS (and I didn't) but when you get it, you will use it and it's a very welcome tool. At least for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
I almost forgot, why do they give full frame values to EF-S lenses?
The cropping is in the camera, not in the lens[A]and with a extension ring or something you could use it on FF [:)]
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
I know it's plastic (which sucks for the ten hundred dollars it costs) and not sealed as other more expensive ones are, but will it do okay in terms of a mist being blown toward the front of the lens?
Don't worry too much. I used it in very harsh condition with regards to dust and I never noticed any dust inside the lens. I have to say I only had the lens for 3 months [A] And yes it is plastic and the more expensive lenses do feel better. But it certainly doesn't feel like plastic-plastic like the 18-55 kit-lens. I liked the build-quality. If you are a pro-photographer and you can't always be careful with your stuff, it might not be the best choice, but for all other people it is just fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
I don't plan on dunkin' it in the pool
Although my 24-105 is weather-sealed, I still won't be dunkin' it in the pool [A]
Hope this helped a bit good luck with it!
Jan
Re: Need one more reason for the EF-S 17-55mm
I have had the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM for about 4 months now and I LOVE it. I don't go anywhere without it. On the hood issue: I bought a 3rd party hood and it keeps rotating or falling off. I threw it in a drawer somewhere, and one of these days I'll get a 60 euro Canon hood for it. Irritates me I didn't get it in the U.S. when I should have. Don't take the cheap way out on that... I just use it without the hood (something I NEVER do on any other lens) and I dont' find it too bad, but I would like to get a hood. This lens is ULTRA sharp, fast and sexy. GET IT! ;)
Re: Need one more reason for the EF-S 17-55mm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan
and one of these days I'll get a 60 euro Canon hood for it
It only costs 32 euros here in the Netherlands...so you might have a bit more luck [H]
Re: Need one more reason for the EF-S 17-55mm
Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
how happy are you with the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8
The distance just isn't right for me. I should have rented one (didn't know about this stuff earlier) to make sure it would work on the short end. I'm at the max end all the timeand I still have to stepback to getmost of the kitchens or whateverin the frame.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
I think the best two-lens combination for a 1.6x body is the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS + 70-200mm f/2.8 IS
That's why I'm going with it I guess. The 10-22mm sounds interesting but it's always nice to have some speed when/if you need it. I do thank you for ponderingmy questions and giving me other choices.
As far as being a pro Jan, the only thing I'm good at is building firewood. On rare days, Iaccidentally make a cabinet[:D]
Re: Need one more reason for the EF-S 17-55mm
Quote:
Originally Posted by andnowimbroke
Speaking of pennies, I need three more to make it happen
Since you've decided the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 isn't right for you, sell it. They seem to be going for ~$350 on FredMiranda, and the couple of them that I looked at soldat that pricewithin 3-4 hours (literally!). That's probably enough pennies...
