Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM

[krzkrzkrz]

Greetings,

Just thinking around the corner and reflecting on one of the members suggestions. Would it be a good idea to scrap / sell the Canon 18-55mm Kit Lens and get a Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM. The Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM is significantly more cost-wise, but provides Image Stabilisation and a gorgeous blur that comes with the constant f/2.8 aperture. I've also read reviews about this lens and the amazing IQ (image quality) and build.

The lens, if not mistaken, sells for around $1080 USD. Good for low-light and mid-range zoom, I think this lens is worth the grab.

I'm thinking of getting this lens and keeping it for a year or two before I invest in the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS. I think having the Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM will keep me busy at the same time, return quality images.

Comments / suggestion are welcome.

Regards,
Krz

[coldrain]

Keep if for a year or two? Do you mean you would get rid of it when you would get a 70-200 f2.8 IS USM?

Just look at what kind of photos you actually would like to make, and get lenses for that purpose that fit your budget NOW. Waiting 2 years will mean 2 years worth of missed photo opportunities and 2 years worth of photography experience lost.

So... do you want to make wide landscape views, crowds or building photos, invest in a wide angle zoom that fits your budget NOW.

Do you want to make macro photos of details, flowers, products or whatever, invest in a macro lens that firts your requirements NOW.

Do you want to have a good quality tele zoom, then get a 70-300 IS USM NOW instead of waiting two years and doing nothing.

If you feel the NEED to have an IS lens at the 17-55 range (why? do you want to make photos in museums where non-flash photography is allowed? Or what is your reason?) and you can afford the EF-S 17-55 IS USM, and you do not have other lens wishes that you should address to allow you to make the photos you want to make, by all means go for it. It is a nice lens.
If you do NOT really have the budget, or you will need funds for other lenses too (EF 70-300 IS USM?), then consider a Sigma 18-50 f2.8 Macro, a Tokina 16-50 f2.8 or a Tamron 17-50 f2.8.

You do not have to go for the most expensive lenses, kr. Yes, some may give a little bit extra in a photo, but if that means you will miss a lot of other photos, it is not the right way to go. Go for good enough within your budget.

[cdifoto]

The 17-55 and 70-200 complement, but do not replace, one another.

[te1221]

http://www.timeng.net/photos/tuna.jpg

taken with the 17-55 :)

[EOS Man]

I'm not sure about the real severity of the issue but I've come about many instances of dust issues which is apparently specifically worse on the EF-S 17-55 f2.8. The ramblings I've read on various sites ranges from "more dust than my other lenses" to "full of dust eventhough left unused in a closed closet". I don't know how far they are true but just something that you might wanna be aware of.

[adam75south]

I'm not sure about the real severity of the issue but I've come about many instances of dust issues which is apparently specifically worse on the EF-S 17-55 f2.8. The ramblings I've read on various sites ranges from "more dust than my other lenses" to "full of dust eventhough left unused in a closed closet". I don't know how far they are true but just something that you might wanna be aware of.

i can't imagine why someone would leave that lens inside a closet unused.

[coldrain]

Haha yes... you can find the weirdest stories on internet if you want to. I guess it will not matter much either, having a dusty lens, if it remains in that closet.

I have no dust in any of my lenses (except 2 specs on the back element of a very cheap 7 year old 28-80 kit lens), a lot of people swear there is a lot of dust in all of their lenses.

A few specs of dust inside a lens will never show up anyway, though. Only dust on a sensor shows up. I guess when you actually will see dust bunnies floating around inside your lens you should start to worry though ;).

[te1221]

so far so good. i've had this lens for about of month with no visible signs of dust yet.

[krzkrzkrz]

Keep if for a year or two? Do you mean you would get rid of it when you would get a 70-200 f2.8 IS USM?

Just look at what kind of photos you actually would like to make, and get lenses for that purpose that fit your budget NOW. Waiting 2 years will mean 2 years worth of missed photo opportunities and 2 years worth of photography experience lost.

So... do you want to make wide landscape views, crowds or building photos, invest in a wide angle zoom that fits your budget NOW.

Do you want to make macro photos of details, flowers, products or whatever, invest in a macro lens that firts your requirements NOW.

Do you want to have a good quality tele zoom, then get a 70-300 IS USM NOW instead of waiting two years and doing nothing.

If you feel the NEED to have an IS lens at the 17-55 range (why? do you want to make photos in museums where non-flash photography is allowed? Or what is your reason?) and you can afford the EF-S 17-55 IS USM, and you do not have other lens wishes that you should address to allow you to make the photos you want to make, by all means go for it. It is a nice lens.
If you do NOT really have the budget, or you will need funds for other lenses too (EF 70-300 IS USM?), then consider a Sigma 18-50 f2.8 Macro, a Tokina 16-50 f2.8 or a Tamron 17-50 f2.8.

You do not have to go for the most expensive lenses, kr. Yes, some may give a little bit extra in a photo, but if that means you will miss a lot of other photos, it is not the right way to go. Go for good enough within your budget.

Thanks for the input. Its given me a few thoughts to think about along the way. I tried the lens today, and realise that IS would best suit my night shots. Other than that, I dont see any other advantage for having it in my type of photography.

The 70-200 is the last lens that I will own, I think. Due to its price. However, I cant wait to own something like this. I believe the top 3 lenses that I would like to have / own in my camera bag would be the Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM, 70-200 f2.8 IS USM and the Canon 10-22mm wide angle. :) :cool: :D