General Consensus on 17-55 f/2.8

[gibbstom13]

I own a 50d, am looking for a replacement lens to the kit 18-55. general "travel" lens...architecture/landscape/everyday material. what does everyone think about this choice?

[Donald]

I don't have that lens. However, I think you'll find a number of past comments on here that speak very highly of the 17-55 IS.

If you click on 'View Tag Cloud' displayed at the left hand side below this message and then, from the list you see, click on lenses, you will be presented with a list of threads in which the subject of lenses has been discussed. You will find many references to the 17-55.

[Glenn NK]

I have the lens - it's a beauty and remains on my 30D. If it would fit on my 5DII, it would be there instead of on the 30D.

I will never sell this lens - if I decide to get another body, it will be APS-C just so I can use it.

There are very few owners that don't like it and don't rave about it.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...&cat=27&page=3

IMO, this lens was made for the APS-C Canon bodies.

Glenn

[arith]

If you want to make life tooo easy, get a efs 17-55 f2.8 IS. The only reason it is not called an L type is because it is efs. From every aperture and focal length the lens beats the camera's resolution, and it is great on CA performance.

The only downside is the price and I use a Tamron where I have to know all the numbers to get pics as good as the Canon; for instance not so good at 24mm, at 17mm not so good at f2.8 in extreme corners but good to excellent from f4 up at 17, 35, 50 without CA at 35mm but great at flare control.

Get the idea; pay £450 more and never have to bother with that stuff.

[NigelD]

A bit like Glenn NK here - the best lens I ever had on my 40D and was really sad to sell it when I went FF. I should have kept the 40D really just so I could keep the 17-55 but funds wouldn't permit FF as well.

[Andy]

I own a 50d, am looking for a replacement lens to the kit 18-55. general "travel" lens...architecture/landscape/everyday material. what does everyone think about this choice?

I like the idea of 15-85mm as a standard zoom more personally.

Not that I own either as I hardly use zooms but a mate once loaned me his 17-55/2.8 and it didn't really float my boat.....seemed a bit short and I already had a bunch of fast primes so didn't need it for f/2.8 either. Quite fancy a 15-85mm as a replacement for my little used(twice in about 3 years!) 17-85mm though.

[rpcrowe]

I love the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS because of its great image quality, its constant f/2.8 aperture, its 17mm end which is about as wide as I generally need to go and because of its great IS capability which (combined with the constant f/2.8 aperture) makes it a very viable low light glass.

However, I agree that it is not quite long enough to be used as an only lens. I do occasionally carry it as my only lens when traveling for non-photo purposes but, I do like a longer focal length. I generally shoot 90% of my imagery with a combination of 17-55mm and 70-200mm f/4L IS on a pair of 1.6x cameras. On a recent trip to China with this setup, I shot 2/3 of my imagery with the 17-55mm and 1/3 with the 70-200mm.

I am not going full-frame and the 17-55mm lens is one of the reasons that I am staying with the 1.6x crop format.

[tihsgod]

Do you really mean you want a replacement? i.e. you just want to have just one lens to carry? If so then that implies you will sell the existing lens and probably get next to nothing for it?

If that is what you are going to do I would personally get something with a wider focal range. Like Andy said something like 15/85. or 24/105

But I would keep the 18-55 and buy a 70/200 f4 to compliment it.

[tchoklat]

Try a Sigma 28-70 f2.8 DG HSM.

tony