Canon EF-S 17-55mm IS USM

[DBECK]

Hi


<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US;" lang="EN-US"]I just got my 17-55mm and430EXII this weekend. Have the 28-135, 70-300 and 50 1,8 like you only different is that my camera is the 400D and I don&acute;t intend to go FF. Cash......<o></o>


<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US;" lang="EN-US"]My first impression is that colors/contrast is better than mymostly jousted 28-135 and autofocus was spot on and silent. Low light indoor shot only - it has been raining for two weeks ;-(<o></o>


<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US;" lang="EN-US"]There is a huge difference from 28 to 17mm on a 1,6 crop.<o></o>


<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US;" lang="EN-US"]Just my 2 c&acute;<o></o>


<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US;" lang="EN-US"]Sorry for the english

[Pamela]

Sorry for not responding sooner...I've been out of town. Just wanted to say thank you for all the great suggestions on the lenses. All of you have listed some great things for me to consider before putting a lot of $ into this lens. I haven't heard many cons about it other than the price &amp; dedicated status. For now, I think the best thing for me to do before getting locked into the the 17-55 EF-S lens is to rent it first--maybe even the 24-70 also. (I'll wait unitl I have another shoot scheduled and make it worth my while.)


One lens that everyone seems to agree on is the fixed 85mm 2.8, and I think this will be a sure purchase for me, and it isn't super expensive, and will work for both camera bodies.


Thanks again everyone for taking the time to reply to my post! It is helpful &amp; appreciated!


Love this forum! [] I'll be back...


Pamela

[Pamela]

oops meant 85mm 1.8 ~ (or 1.2 if i save longer!)

[BCalkins]

Renting is a great idea - it is surprising how much a weekend can tell you about a lens. I think both lenses you are considering are capable of excellent results. To me there are two main differences between the lenses:


1. Range/IS. To me, the 17-55 wasn't enough reach for portrait type shots, even of the kids. I often wished I could zoom tighter. If you are mostly interested in portraits, I'd go with the 24-70 over the 17-55. If your focus is more environmental portraits, or landscapes, etc. then the 17-55 has a more useful range. IS doens't help with action on a focal length this wide- I find with the kids moving anything below 1/125s is starting to get some blur - and you don't need IS for 1/125s in this focal length range. Also - the IS doesn't handle panning, so if you are following something moving it won't help you there, either. On the other hand, IS can be great for picking up some ambient light behind a flash illuminated subject. The 17-55 was great for babies, but once they start walking it isn't as useful.


2. Build quality / size. There is definitely a trade off between weight and build quality. True, if the body isn't weather sealed you don't have a sealed package, but I still think there is some merit to having a sealed lens, even if the body isn't. Anecdotal evidence is never convincing, but I did have to get my 17-55mm serviced after the IS/aperture ring failed after about a year. My L lenses feel much better built. That said, it shouldn't be a huge factor if you don't shoot in bad weather and take good care of your equipment.


I used to have the 17-55 and eventually got a 24-105L. I had both for a long time, and rarely got out the 17-55mm, despite the faster aperture. Nothing to do with the quality of the shots, everything to do with the focal length range. When I really did want a wide lens, 17 wasn't wide enough (interior room shots, etc.). I ultimately decided to sell the 17-55 and replaced it with a 10-22mm. This isn't a simple choice, of course, since the 10-22mm + 24-xxx is almost twice the cost of just the 17-55mm. Just wanted to add my experience to the mix - keep in mind that focal length range is very personal - there are just as many who would argue the opposite: 24mm isn't wide enough for a walk around lens ona crop body...