Woohoo, it's here!

[RuggerJoe]

My EF-S 17-85 IS USM got here today. This is a pretty hefty piece of glass, at least compared to what I am used to. Put it on my XTwith my 580EX (that came in the same box) and the whole thing is a brick. Now i understand why people have been getting the grip to help balance.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Congrats. Gotta change your signature!

[Dante King]

so where are your duck pics? Congrats by the way.

[Carzee]

DDDddducks
DDDddducks
DDDddducks
DDDddducks
DDDddducks
DDDddducks

[condyk]

He hasn't done the box shoot phase yet :evil: and then there is the test chart or the battery things in line ... but that might be just for L's :confused:

[kevin_c]

He hasn't done the box shoot phase yet :evil: and then there is the test chart or the battery things in line ... but that might be just for L's :confused:
:D :D :D :D

[AlexMa]

That feeling of new glass...............

makes me gitty

[RuggerJoe]

I don't want to upset the glass gods, so here is my offering - duck shot, box shot with batteries set up to do a focus test. The 17-85, 580EX and the duckie (its hard to find a duck in Chicago when it's cold and snowing) are new. I hope I wasn't trying to over achieve. :D

[Steve Parr]

My EF-S 17-85 IS USM got here today. This is a pretty hefty piece of glass, at least compared to what I am used to. Put it on my XTwith my 580EX (that came in the same box) and the whole thing is a brick. Now i understand why people have been getting the grip to help balance.


This lens is on my short list. I'd love to see some samples...

Steve

[RuggerJoe]

Well it's snowing and I threw out my back so I haven't been able to take very many from my bed or couch. But I was bored and was trying to see just how good the IS was. These were both shot at 85mm 1/20 f5.6 at ISO800 under ambient light. I didn't do any post process other than resizing and adjusting the exposure in camera raw. I was pretty impressed.

[Raj]

Wow, should definately increase the #of keepers !
Congrats

[Mills]

Enjoy your new toys!

[RuggerJoe]

Wow, should definately increase the #of keepers !
Congrats

I think so...I've tossed alot of shots that would have otherwise been good if it weren't for camera shake. I seem to have trouble even when I keep the speed under 1/focal length. I'd cut out coffee to help, but I don't drink coffee. If the jersy test shots are any indicationof IS's effectiveness I think most of the lenses I buy from now on will have IS.

[nitsch]

I don't want to upset the glass gods, so here is my offering - duck shot, box shot with batteries set up to do a focus test. The 17-85, 580EX and the duckie (its hard to find a duck in Chicago when it's cold and snowing) are new. I hope I wasn't trying to over achieve. :D

Hehe! LOL! :lol: This is great! Enjoy the new lens! :D

[ChopstickHero]

very nice... i wish IS was in more lenses...

[zacker]

very nice... i wish IS was in more lenses...

i wish it were in the bodies like "other" manufactures do!

frickin Canon....
lol
Hey, I almost went with the 17-85 but i already have the 28-135 IS so i got the siggie 10-20 instead..
congrats on the lens and good luck with the back, im in the same boat, lost a vertabra in my neck 2 years ago and it keeps getting aggrevated every now and then and when it does i get sidelined for about 3 or 4 days, im just comming off one now... it aint a good time!
-zacker-

[Jon]

Canon doesn't put IS in the body for one very good reason. The 1D, 1D II, and 1D IIN are the only cameras it would work on. For IS in the body to work properly, the lens has to cover more than the basic sensor. Thus it wouldn't work with EF-S lenses on the APS-C line, or with EF lenses on the FF cameras. Only the APS-H cameras would be able to use this reliably. With IS in the lens, you know when it's there; you don't have to worry about forgetting to re-enable it when you change lenses from an unsupported lens to a supported one. And the IS can be calibrated to function optimally for the lens in use. In-body IS would need to shift the sensor by different amounts depending on the focal length in use. By designing it into the lens, Canon is able to place the shifting elements where they'll have the maximum stabilizing effect with the minimum degradation of image quality, and the minimum effort (hence battery power) required.

[zacker]

how does the konica minolta get around this then? or does thiers just suck?
I have read reviews and they say it works great. I think canon is just screwing us with this in lens stuff. I must look into this now...see what the deal is.. thanks for the info Jon.
-zacker-

[zacker]

how does the konica minolta get around this then? or does thiers just suck?
I have read reviews and they say it works great. I think canon is just screwing us with this in lens stuff. I must look into this now...see what the deal is.. thanks for the info Jon.
-zacker-

[Jon]

how does the konica minolta get around this then? or does thiers just suck?
I have read reviews and they say it works great. I think canon is just screwing us with this in lens stuff. I must look into this now...see what the deal is.. thanks for the info Jon.
-zacker-
They have the smaller sensor of an APS-C, but don't make any lenses other than those for their FF bodies. What's going to happen with Sigma's DC lenses, or Tamron Di II lenses on a Minolta with IS active? And, as has been posted elsewhere, by another member of this board, K-M users, when asked to test their IS on 300 mm or so lenses, haven't yet stepped up to the plate.

[crn3371]

Congrats on the lens, Joe. I bought myself one for Christmas, along with a 430ex. IMHO, possibly the best walkabout lens you can get.

[MJP]

need to buy me my own duck....any suggestion?

[RuggerJoe]

need to buy me my own duck....any suggestion?

I got my duck (genus: Ubberray uckieday) at Target for $2. :lol: