17-55 IS first and second impressions

[billh101]

I got this lens for Christmas and couldn't wait to take the 17-40 off my 20d and try it out. My first impression: disappointment. But read on. I was trying to push the limits of the IS with snapshots of my kids indoors and wasn't getting sharp pics. I quickly learned that even if someone is sitting still, if they are breathing, there is still subtle movement. It's a lens, not a miracle worker. Used at reasonable shutter speeds, it did a fine job. I haven't tried it out for indoor, architecture type shots, but have high hopes for that. That's really the main reason I wanted the IS lens. I'm taking a trip to Spain this summer and want to be able to get good shots inside the cathederals with existing light and no tripod.

Then I went outside before dusk to try it out a couple days over the last week. My next impression: awesome! I don't like to carry a tripod around and often push the limits of my ability to handhold. Then I usually get back home and examine the shots on my computer screen only to be disappointed in the sharpness. Not so with this lens. I got shots at 1/10 of a second that still looked great at 100%. Granted I was shooting at 17mm, but trust me, I'm not that steady. This is amazing for me.

If you don't need the IS, save your money and get one of the other fine options out there. But, if you're like me and like being able to handhold a couple stops slower, I think it's worth the price. There is no question this is going to increase my keepers. Is it as sharp as my 50 1.4 at 2.8? I haven't done any controlled tests, but I don't think so. However, I'd say it's sharper than my 17-40, and sharp enough that I'm not going to worry about it. In conclusion, I'm really liking this lens and am in no hurry to go full frame for a while now that I have this. By the way, I've been using it for a week and haven't noticed any dust in it yet, but I do keep UV filters on all my lenses for protection.

Bill

[nicksan]

What kind of shutter speeds were you using for the indoors shots that you were disappointed with?

I find that for indoors shots, I almost always have to boost the ISO in order to get good shutter speeds.

[billh101]

I'd have to go back and look at some, but varying shutter speeds from 1/8-1/30 of a second. That's eventually what I did, kick the ISO up to 800 and that helped. So, I don't think the IS is not of much benefit for snapshots of the kids. But, that's fine. I'll never print those kind of snapshots bigger than 4x6 anyway, so a little noise isn't going to hurt anything. It's the landscape and still life kind of shots that I do enlarge to 12x18 sometimes, and the IS is going to be awesome for that.

[nicksan]

I'd have to go back and look at some, but varying shutter speeds from 1/8-1/30 of a second. That's eventually what I did, kick the ISO up to 800 and that helped. So, I don't think the IS is not of much benefit for snapshots of the kids. But, that's fine. I'll never print those kind of snapshots bigger than 4x6 anyway, so a little noise isn't going to hurt anything. It's the landscape and still life kind of shots that I do enlarge to 12x18 sometimes, and the IS is going to be awesome for that.

I find that at around 1/8 I don't get as many keepers...still I absolutely get more keepers than if IS was turned off, so it is useful if you think some vs. none. I've taken shots in dim churches that I would have never been able to take.

ISO800 isn't too bad, esp. if you shoot RAW and clean it up in PP. You can get pretty good results...at 1600 it does get kinda noisy, but you can still clean that up with something like Noise Ninja. (DPP's noise reduction is pretty limited...but still does a pretty decent job on ISO400 pics that I have...)

I think it's important to keep expectations at a reasonable level. That said, I think the 17-55 is really an exceptional lens. At least for the 1.6x body there is nothing like it in the market, plus it can be found for under a grand so it's an even better value now.

Looks like you have a pretty good handle on this lens. I'm sure you will enjoy it!

[superdiver]

Use a noise reducer and ISO of 1600 wont hurt at all...I do it all the time...

[Big Mike]

As you have figured out...IS does nothing to freeze blur caused by subject movement...it only helps with camera shake. To freeze both subject and camera movement...high shutter speeds are needed.

That being said, I just received my first IS lens...and I'm loving it so far :D

[SoundsGood]

I was trying to push the limits of the IS with snapshots of my kids indoors and wasn't getting sharp pics. I quickly learned that even if someone is sitting still, if they are breathing, there is still subtle movement.
Wow, I'd be disappointed too.

Does this mean that IS is useless with kids? (if so, I might think about getting Tamron's 17-50 instead, since I mostly take pictures of kids)

[ed rader]

Wow, I'd be disappointed too.

Does this mean that IS is useless with kids? (if so, I might think about getting Tamron's 17-50 instead, since I mostly take pictures of kids)

you'll get more keepers with IS.

PERIOD.

when dealing with movement you have to mind your shutter speed and that has nothing to do with IS and is a constant for all lenses.


ed rader

[sandpiper]

Wow, I'd be disappointed too.

Does this mean that IS is useless with kids? (if so, I might think about getting Tamron's 17-50 instead, since I mostly take pictures of kids)

Pretty much, yes. Unless you have that rare type of kid that can sit perfectly still, while you take a picture. This assumes you aren't talking about a long lens. With a short zoom like a 17-55, you should be able to hand hold at 1/60 without any trouble or using IS, any slower shutter speeds, where IS would be of help, are likely to show subject blur on a significant number of shots.

IS controls camera shake and that allows you to use a slower shutter speed without blur from the cameras movement. At speeds under 1/30 second a moving subject is likely to move enough to blur across the frame to some degree. IS cannot freeze subject motion, so you can shoot at 1/8 second, as the OP tried, and the room and furniture should be sharp (assuming they are in the zone of sharp focus) but the kids will have moved significantly (or at least hands / head are likely to have moved) to blur.

If you mostly photograph kids at play, you want the fastest lens you can buy, rather than IS. Of course a f1.8 IS lens would be ideal.

[billh101]

Wow, I'd be disappointed too.

Does this mean that IS is useless with kids? (if so, I might think about getting Tamron's 17-50 instead, since I mostly take pictures of kids)

Useless? Not completely. If the kids are sitting still and you don't push the shutter speed too slow, you will get more keepers. But, if you're thinking of taking pics of kids at play, you will pretty much need to keep the speeds pretty fast and won't benefit as much from IS. So, if that is the case, the Tamron may serve you just as well. Still, I'd be willing to bet that if you tried the IS lens out for general use (not just shots of kids in motion) you probably wouldn't want to part with it. Like any equipment, you just need to get used to the lens and learn it's limitations as well as it's strengths, then you'll be able to get the most out of it. In my opinion, the benefits outweigh the limitations, including the price.

[poah]

if you are taking pics of kids you want flash not IS

[Skrim17]

...IS doesn't freeze action, a fast shutter does regardless of the lens.

[SoundsGood]

If you mostly photograph kids at play, you want the fastest lens you can buy, rather than IS.

Of course a f1.8 IS lens would be ideal.
Tried that. But f/1.8 had such a slim DOF that it too was useless. Actually, I find f/5.6 to be ideal with the kids.

[SoundsGood]

if you are taking pics of kids you want flash not IS
Not if you're outside during the day. ;)

[nicksan]

I would agree with the flash suggestion as well.
No kids here...but 2 cats...and they also never stay still!

Everyone is right when they say that IS won't stop action. It will only assist in YOUR movements, not the subject's.

That said, I recently purchased a 580EX flash and it's done wonders. Takes a little learning, but I am able to take pictures of my MOVING cats without worrying about the noise with the higher ISO needed for shutter speed.

Personally I found that even boosting the ISO, it really all depends on the lighting conditions...most of the times I am SOL.

But with the 580EX, it's an entirely different ballgame!

[nicksan]

Tried that. But f/1.8 had such a slim DOF that it too was useless. Actually, I find f/5.6 to be ideal with the kids.


...and with f/5.6 indoors, what kind of shutter speed can one expect? I personally don't think it would be fast enough to stop action. I guess it all depends on what you are shootingm distance to the subject, etc...

But in a regular house, dim lights, evenings or night time, what can one expect with someting like the nifty...or even the 50mm 1.4? (Other than the flash solution...)

[RedSox]

IS is more usefull at the long end of the zoom lens. With IS lens, I can shoot 3-than non-IS lens. But at short end of the zoom, it is hard to get blur free pictures 2 stops lower than no-IS lens.

[SoundsGood]

...and with f/5.6 indoors, what kind of shutter speed can one expect?
No, I meant outdoors. Indoors I've always had to use a flash.

Actually, I thought that IS and f/2.8 might eliminate the need for flash with the kids -- but apparently not!

[SoundsGood]

IS is more usefull at the long end of the zoom lens.
Hmmm.... I'm really starting to wonder if/when IS will help at this range.

[RedSox]

Hmmm.... I'm really starting to wonder if/when IS will help at this range.

Just to clarify, the short end of the zoom, i mean the wide side of the zoom. So 17-55IS at 17 on a 1.6x crop body or 24-105IS at 24 on a FF. Not the 70-200IS at 70, at which IS is still very effective in terms stablization.

[JaGWiRE]

Just to clarify, the short end of the zoom, i mean the wide side of the zoom. So 17-55IS at 17 on a 1.6x crop body or 24-105IS at 24 on a FF. Not the 70-200IS at 70, at which IS is still very effective in terms stablization.

How's the IS on the wide end if you are doing landscape shots? What if you place your camera down on something where there is a little wind or something, and take a photo, and the camera has probably less shake then in your hands, but still shake.
I would think you'd be able to get like 1/8sec photos landscape w/o image blur easy. Am I wrong? I know I can shoot pretty low shutter at the wide end and be fine, although I generally be safe and keep it at the same speed as the focal length.

[JaGWiRE]

Oh, what's the f-stop range at 17mm, and at the less wide end (50mm?) This is important to me, because I am thinking of getting this lens, and I need something for night shots with a very small aperture on the wide part (17-30mm pretty much.)

[Skrim17]

It is a constant 2.8 I believe.

[SoundsGood]

i mean the wide side of the zoom. So 17-55IS at 17 on a 1.6x crop body or 24-105IS at 24 on a FF. Not the 70-200IS at 70, at which IS is still very effective in terms stablization.
Yeah, thanks, I agree with you. In fact I've got a 70-200 f/4 IS on the way. It's the 17-55 vs. 24-105 on a 350D that's drivin' me nuts! :confused:

[JaGWiRE]

It is a constant 2.8 I believe.

I am talking about the small aperture value (opposite of wide open), at say 17mm, 30mm, and 55mm.

[timmytimmytimmy]

I am talking about the small aperture value (opposite of wide open), at say 17mm, 30mm, and 55mm.

I believe its a constant f22

[JaGWiRE]

I believe its a constant f22

Oh that's pretty nice. On my 30 1.4, I love doing land scapes, but the f/16 can leave something to desire at times.

[CyberPet]

On Christmas morning I decided against using a flash (I do have two) to photograph when the nephew and niece did open their presents in available light (plus a ceiling lamp) using ISO 1600 while shooting with the 17-55. Almost all images are keepers, even the ones with some motion blur in them (as kids do move around). It just gives the ambient and emotion of the day that way. I find with a good exposure ISO 1600 is doing very good when it comes to noise, and I don't feel the need to use Noise reduction on all images.

The 17-55/2.8 IS is one of my all time favorite lenses next to the 70-200/2.8L IS. :)

[SoundsGood]

I find with a good exposure ISO 1600 is doing very good when it comes to noise, and I don't feel the need to use Noise reduction on all images.
Is that on the 350D? I find 1600 to be kinda noisy, myself.

[CyberPet]

Yes, that's the 350D and yes, the noise is not as bad with good exposure, compared to if you almost underexpose, then the noise is worse. I only use noise reduction with images where the noise is obvious as most images aren't printed in poster sizes and won't be as obvious as if you're pixel peeping. ;)

[narlus]

if people are scared of using ISO 800 and 1600, they should read this thread:
http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=222969

[billh101]

How's the IS on the wide end if you are doing landscape shots? What if you place your camera down on something where there is a little wind or something, and take a photo, and the camera has probably less shake then in your hands, but still shake.
I would think you'd be able to get like 1/8sec photos landscape w/o image blur easy. Am I wrong? I know I can shoot pretty low shutter at the wide end and be fine, although I generally be safe and keep it at the same speed as the focal length.

The IS benefit is more obvious at the long end of the lens, but it helps on the wide end too. 1/8 sec. seems to be about the slowest I'm successful with using the IS handheld. Here is a handheld sample at 17mm for 1/8 sec., f11, iso400...

http://www.pbase.com/billhuegerich/image/72505553

And here is a faster shot at 55 mm...

http://www.pbase.com/billhuegerich/image/72505556

[JaGWiRE]

The IS benefit is more obvious at the long end of the lens, but it helps on the wide end too. 1/8 sec. seems to be about the slowest I'm successful with using the IS handheld. Here is a handheld sample at 17mm for 1/8 sec., f11, iso400...

http://www.pbase.com/billhuegerich/image/72505553

And here is a faster shot at 55 mm...

http://www.pbase.com/billhuegerich/image/72505556

Very nice, that's the stuff I'm interested in.
Also, can you shoot landscape with a tripod outside, and use the IS to your advantage on a tripod? I.E. if it's quite windy, and your tripod is solid, but somebody walks by and it gets a very little amount of shake, can the IS do anything to negate that in say a 10 second exposure?

[jasestu]

Very nice, that's the stuff I'm interested in.
Also, can you shoot landscape with a tripod outside, and use the IS to your advantage on a tripod? I.E. if it's quite windy, and your tripod is solid, but somebody walks by and it gets a very little amount of shake, can the IS do anything to negate that in say a 10 second exposure?

I was about to tell you that you couldn't use the IS with a tripod because it's supposed to get into some nasty sort of feedback loop if the camera was rock steady (e.g. good tripod), so that if you had it turned IS on it would actually create motion blur. However I've just tested that now (2 sec exposure, mirror lock up, camera sitting on a solid bench, and I could hear the IS running) and saw no evidence of any blur...

As far as helping in the situation you describe it would depend on the magnitude of the shake, and since you're talking 'a very little amount', I expect it would be beneficial to have IS on when using a tripod.

[JaGWiRE]

I was about to tell you that you couldn't use the IS with a tripod because it's supposed to get into some nasty sort of feedback loop if the camera was rock steady (e.g. good tripod), so that if you had it turned IS on it would actually create motion blur. However I've just tested that now (2 sec exposure, mirror lock up, camera sitting on a solid bench, and I could hear the IS running) and saw no evidence of any blur...

As far as helping in the situation you describe it would depend on the magnitude of the shake, and since you're talking 'a very little amount', I expect it would be beneficial to have IS on when using a tripod.
That's what I thought.
BTW, what is mirror lockup and when should I use it? I have been doing my long exposures with just a shutter release cable or the timer, and been getting fine results.

[aparmley]

Hope you don't mind Bill -

But a little IS mixed with a little flash does wonders as well . . .

I don't have kids but I do have a pup - same concept I think. No noise reduction;handheld.

F3.5 | ISO 800 | 1/8 | Bounced flash - 35mm
http://Parmley.smugmug.com/photos/120646408-L.jpg

F3.5 | ISO 800 | 1/8 | Bounced flash - 35mm
http://Parmley.smugmug.com/photos/120646385-L.jpg

[Skrim17]

well I just ordered this lens so I can do my own experimenting :)

[jasestu]

That's what I thought.
BTW, what is mirror lockup and when should I use it? I have been doing my long exposures with just a shutter release cable or the timer, and been getting fine results.

Custom function 07 on my 400D, it gets the mirror up and out of the way well before the shutter opens - gives the camera time to settle from any tiny vibration that may be caused by the mirror moving. I just use it out of habit when doing tripod work. I don't have a remote release, so setting mirror lock up has another advantage as it reduces the self timer countdown from 10 to 2 seconds.

...and to contrast with my earlier comments here's an excerpt from the manual for this lens:

Set the STABILIZER switch to OFF when you are taking pictures using the Bulb setting (long exposures). If the STABILIZER switch is set to ON, the image stabilizer function may introduce errors.

and

When you use a tripod, the Image Stabilizer should be turned off to save battery power

Me thinks your 10 seconds would qualify as bulb, my 2 sec test exposure mentioned earlier probably wouldn't...

[JaGWiRE]

Custom function 07 on my 400D, it gets the mirror up and out of the way well before the shutter opens - gives the camera time to settle from any tiny vibration that may be caused by the mirror moving. I just use it out of habit when doing tripod work. I don't have a remote release, so setting mirror lock up has another advantage as it reduces the self timer countdown from 10 to 2 seconds.

...and to contrast with my earlier comments here's an excerpt from the manual for this lens:

Set the STABILIZER switch to OFF when you are taking pictures using the Bulb setting (long exposures). If the STABILIZER switch is set to ON, the image stabilizer function may introduce errors.

and

When you use a tripod, the Image Stabilizer should be turned off to save battery power

Me thinks your 10 seconds would qualify as bulb, my 2 sec test exposure mentioned earlier probably wouldn't...

Perhaps. I do remember reading about the new lenses being able to have IS on for long exposures. Sometimes you have a little bit of wind or you byacedently tap very lightly at your tripod, and it doesn't even affect your photo, but when you waiting whatever second for it to close, your freaking out.

[constrict]

most of my shots were done with the 17-55 IS...

http://constrict.deviantart.com/gallery