Then you might consider getting a copy of the Canon EF 17-85 IS. If you have a Digital Rebel, XT, or 20D and have been shooting with a kit lens, this is one of the lenses that a lot of people buy as their first upgrade. Some people just buy it in place of the kit lens when they purchase the camera body. It's an extremely popular lens because the range and size are just right for taking anywhere. I personally debated getting this lens because I wasn't sure about the quality of the glass and my main concern was that it wasn't fast enough for all occasions. One of the more frustrating things for me about the kit lens, as great as it was for such minimal cost, was that the aperture wasn't fixed. I found myself having to bump up the ISO to make up for the lack of an f-stop or two. For those who are new to photography, that basically means you have to compensate for the fact that the lens can't let enough light into the sensor so you have to make the sensor more sensitive (but also at the cost of lower quality and more grainy results) with the higher ISO setting.I decided I didn't want to take that risk and went all out since it was supposed to be my walk-around lens that I'd carry all the time. I picked up the expensive EF 24-70 f/2.8L lens that so many pros use because I thought it had a decent enough focal length range and at 2.8 it was fast enough for all my lightning needs. It cost $1100 and after actually hanging it around my neck, I decided it wasn't going to work for my current needs. The lens itself is relatively huge and weighs a ton on a 20D. I returned the lens after talking to a friend who is a professional photographer who basically recommended picking up the 17-85 IS. He owned both (among others) and said that it was perfect for walking around because it had both the wide end and a decent telephoto length. That and it cost half as much! He allayed all my fears that the picture quality wouldn't be very good. I was also going to be taking a trip for a few weeks to Europe and really wanted a lens that could do it all. So I bought it and have been pretty happy with my results.
Is it a pro lens? Not by any means. I know that if I kept the 24-70 the results would probably be better. But that being said, I am getting good results for half the price. When I was in Europe having the 17-85 range was about as perfect as I could have wanted. It was light and small enough that I could fit it into my compact Tamron Velocity 6 bag and the additional weight was negligible. The IS is a nice feature but don't think that it makes up for the lack of aperture width. I tried to fool myself into thinking that when I bought the lens, but I see now that having a fixed 2.8 is something you just can't make up with IS. But other than that, I'm very satisfied with this purchase. Another lens you might want to look into if you're checking this one out is the Canon EF 17-40 f/4. It's comparable in price, has a fixed f/4 but just doesn't have the additional zoom length to it. Pictures are great though and it's also relatively compact. To learn more about this and other lenses, check out a site I made for Canon Digital SLR users at Hopefully you'll find it helpful in deciding which walkaround lens is right for you.
The maximum aperture of this lens is not very large, being f/4 on the wide end, and f/5.6 on the telephoto end. The image stabilization makes up for this some, as you can comfortably shoot at much slower shutter speeds than otherwise, but, let's be honest here; this lens is a poor performer if you want to shoot in low light with no tripod. The small aperture makes for a dark viewfinder, which can be a very big problem if you are trying to compose a picture in the dark (using a tripod).
Yet, I still gave this very imperfect lens four stars, and this is not without reason.
First of all, the focal length range is quite handy. It isn't a mega-zoom that does everything, however, it covers the most often used focal length ranges, and is an appropriate lens to use for the vast majority of situations. The little bit of extra zoom on the telephoto end is handy on occasion, and it's also worth noting that the lens sharpens up quite a bit when you zoom in some it might be soft on the wide end, but zoomed in, it's quite good.
I have printed as large as 20x30" using this lens on a Digital Rebel, and have no qualms with the results. Yes, there are sharper lenses out there, but you are a lot more likely to see the difference in sharpness on your computer monitor than in a print.
This lens has ring USM, which enables it to focus very quietly, and very quickly, whereas the slightly cheaper (and F2.8) options from the 3rd parties have normal focusing motors that are slow and noisy by comparison.
If you want to use this lens indoors, you are best off getting a flash to go with it, such as a 430EX. The lens is usable in fantastic indoor lighting, or during the day, but won't give you good results in low light with no flash.
If you will be shooting in lower light situations (people in particular), Tamron and Sigma have some good options in the 17-50mm range with F2.8 apertures, and I would recommend those lenses over this one. If you'd prefer the extra telephoto range, the image stabilization so you can shoot with smaller aperture in poorer lighting situations for greater depth of field (instead of needing to shoot a landscape at f/4, for instance, without image stabilization, you could use f/11 on this lens, and get a sharp picture with better depth of field. This is even more useful in the close focus range while this isn't a true macro lens, if you take closeup photos without a tripod, you will want to stop the lens down for greater depth of field, and the IS helps with that quite a bit.
Overall, I've been fairly pleased with the performance of this lens. If you like to worry about splitting hairs, and zooming all the way in on pictures on your computer, this lens is likely to dissapoint you. If, however, you are willing to sacrifice optical perfection to get a very well rounded, useful lens, then I'd recommend it, however, would also recommend that you consider the 3rd party options, as they are also great lenses, and do offer a somewhat better value.
Buy Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 Image Stabilized USM SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLR's Now
I have been using this lens for a week and getting absolutely flawless pictures no flares, fringing etc. I also did some semi-controlled tests with Image Stablizer and it works as advertised, resulting in much sharper pics indoors. USM focusing works great too, and the lens is/feels well built.One gripe at $600, I would have liked it to come with a hood ("sold" separately but not available yet) and a case (also "sold" separately).
The real question IMO is not whether it's a great lens or not, but whether it's worth $600 as opposed to the kit lens (EF-S 18-55) + EF 28-135 IS. This combo is $100 cheaper and gives greater coverage on the telephoto end. On the other hand, EF-S 17-85 lens claims to have better optics, circular aperture, convenience of a single workhorse lens and IS on the wide end too.
Ultimately it's your call. My take is that if you spend $800 to $1500 on a digital SLR, you owe it to yourself to spend $600 on good lenses (and another $200 on 420ex flash ;-).After my initial disappointment with the kit lens that came on my Rebel Xt I first bought and fell in love with the 70-300 DO lens, which I have also reviewed. That gave me a taste of what a decent Canon Lens can do. It was not long before I bought the 17-85 IS lens and gave away the kit lens to make sure I would never see it again.
Not only is this a quality lens -much sharper than the 18-55mm -but the IS feature will improve your low light pictures regardless of your ability (unless of course you always use a tripod). You will find yourself taking shots (indoors especially) that were simply not possible with the kit lens.
Because this lens will zoom to 85mm (equivalent to 136 mm on standard 35mm cameras) it makes a great carry anytime lens for many situations. Of course, it is significantly heavier than the kit lens but the quality is well worth it.
You should note that the picture that shows up on Amazon is a bit misleading. The item pictured is certainly the correct lens but the picture is a bit squashed making it look much shorter than it really is. The lens measures 4 inches when not extended.
Finally, if buying this lens, do yourself a favor and, at the very least also buy a UV-filter. Note that the filter size if 67mm which is bigger than the one on the kit lens.
Want Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 Image Stabilized USM SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLR's Discount?
I've had a Rebel (original) for more than a year, got my 20D about 6 months ago. Been using the kit lens 17-55 mostly to shoot karate with flash, this works fine unless the subject is on the other side of the gym where there isn't enough high end magnification with the kit lens. This lens has been getting mixed reviews since it came out, some hate it, others love it. I suppose that I have yet to see anything I "hate" about it but I do agree that the price is really high. The thing about these lenses is that Canon (as they've done in other areas with their digital camera line) doesn't sell communication protocals so others can make lenses that work correctly with their bodies, they do their best to maintain a monopoly which means if you need this lens range it's about the only game in town. Third party lenses are all reverse engineered and may not work on future bodies and generally focus more slowly (with the exception of sigma XT which are just about as expensive as real Canon glass).I've only had a little chance to shoot with this guy but so far I've got no complaints, unlike my kit lens I find this guy focuses better in one of the AI focus modes than in single shot mode (only the 20D has multiple focus modes). I don't agree with the folks that say color saturation and contrast are bad...I just don't see that.
If you're wealthy enough to be able to replace this lens with several bodies and fixed lenses then of course those will be sharper. I've also got the 28-135IS which is a fantastic lens but doesn't have enough low end when I'm shooting action occuring right in front of me. So far I like this lens, as I shoot more with it I might find things I don't like but if you need this range it's really the only game in town. Most reviews recommend a hood, which should come with it at this price, because of the wide angle you need a "flower petal" hood and you can get them on ebay for around 8 bucks generic instead of $30.00 for canon brand (what a rip for a hunk of plastic). You also want to get yourself a UV filter for it first thing, that guy protects your lens and also improves color in my experience.
I do find this is a slightly "darker" lens than the kit lens so you either have to adjust in software or kick your exposure up a little if you're like me and like heavy saturation. I like the range this lens offers, it's perfect for your typical basketball sized gymnasium so you don't have to use the "sneaker-zoom" any more than necessary.
Save 43% Off
No comments:
Post a Comment