EF 17-40/4L vs EF-S 17-85/4-5.6 USM IS (matching with 20D)

[srweal]

I'm going to make my first move into dSLR (currently have a G3) with a 20D and am considering which lens(es) to get first up.

With the announcement of the new EF-S lenses from Canon, I saw that the 17-85 is going to be priced similarly to the existing 17-40L. Any preferences? I know one is longer than the other, but I want to know how sufficient users find the 17-40L for everyday and travel photography.

I was also thinking of getting a 50/1.8 and maybe a longer lens somewhere down the track with IS.

Finally, I'd also like some recommendations on where to buy this kind of gear from. I'm in Australia, but I'm visiting to Princeton in late-October and was wanting to get my new camera while over there. Any tips on how to make sure I'll get stock and the best price (i.e. avoiding sales taxes)?

Steve

[Jesper]

Nobody has really tried out the EF-S 17-85 IS USM yet, so we don't know yet how good it really is compared to the 17-40L. The 17-40L is a very good and popular lens. If the EF-S 17-85 is also good optically, I'd prefer it above the 17-40L because of the extra zoom range and IS.

[nosquare2003]

Do you think that you will get the EF-s 10-22?

There's an overlap of some focal lengths for 17-22mm for both lenses if you pick up the super wide angle.

[samdring]

Nobody has really tried out the EF-S 17-85 IS USM yet, so we don't know yet how good it really is compared to the 17-40L. The 17-40L is a very good and popular lens. If the EF-S 17-85 is also good optically, I'd prefer it above the 17-40L because of the extra zoom range and IS.

Agreed but if Steve is correct in saying they are the same price, Canon doesn't have a habit of producing a lens which will knock out another lens from the market. Twice the reach, same price, same quality??

[CoolToolGuy]

Since the 17-40 L was created, by Canon's own admission, for the DSLR market I wonder if it will either be discontinued or otherwise modified to differentiate it from the 17-85 IS. Longer? Faster? Perhaps an EF-S L?

Have Fun,

[Andy_T]

Agreed but if Steve is correct in saying they are the same price, Canon doesn't have a habit of producing a lens which will knock out another lens from the market. Twice the reach, same price, same quality??

I think that the 17-85 IS will be measured on the 28-135 IS.

This lens does not have the same optical quality as the 17-40L, and is not as fast, but it is longer and has IS. For these reasons, the price is roughly comparable (although the 28-135 is a bit cheaper than the 17-40L)

So I assume that the 17-85 will be optically closer to the 18-55 than to the 17-40. But we really can just wait for some lens tests.

Best regards,
Andy

[John_T]

I'm definitely getting the EF-S 17-85 IS, though B&H don't have it listed yet.

Here's something if you haven't seen it:

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/efs/efs_lenses

...and Reichmann had an EF-S17-85 IS with the 20D he tested:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/20d-part2.shtml

[Tom W]

Since the 17-40 L was created, by Canon's own admission, for the DSLR market I wonder if it will either be discontinued or otherwise modified to differentiate it from the 17-85 IS. Longer? Faster? Perhaps an EF-S L?

Have Fun,

I doubt if they'll change it, since it is fully compatible with all Canon's EOS cameras. I think that there's be some serious compromises at the wide end (at least on 1.3X or FF) if the lens was expanded to cover a longer range. Remember that the 17-40 doesn't enjoy the benefits of the smaller image circle nor the benefit of the deeper rear-element penetration into the camera body.

Granted, the DSLR was a major factor in its development, but at this time, I don't think Canon's going to make anything "L" exclusively for the EF-S mount. I would think that they'd lose a good chunk of the "L"-type customers that way.

Of course, down the road a ways, things could change, but not for quite a while, I'd think.

[Tom W]

I think that the 17-85 IS will be measured on the 28-135 IS.

This lens does not have the same optical quality as the 17-40L, and is not as fast, but it is longer and has IS. For these reasons, the price is roughly comparable (although the 28-135 is a bit cheaper than the 17-40L)

So I assume that the 17-85 will be optically closer to the 18-55 than to the 17-40. But we really can just wait for some lens tests.

Best regards,
Andy

Actually, I think that the 17-85 is going to be a gem - probably as good or better than the 28-135 is on a full-frame or film camera. I'd not hesitate to consider this as a versatile walkaround lens if I had an EF-S mount, and wasn't expecting to someday move to a larger sensor.

[CoolToolGuy]

Well, Tom, not being anywhere near what you would call knowledgeable in optical design, I can't claim to be in the know, but I think there will be a decided shift in Canon's lens offerings over the next couple of years. The pendulum is swinging to the digital side, and I think you will see more lenses made for the 1.6 factor. Be they EF-S mount or not, I think Canon will start to produce those lenses that give the ranges of the full-frame equivalents - like the 17-85 IS and the 10-22. That leaves the 17-40 a bit in the cold unless they make it faster or increase its length.

Plus, however they handle it, they need to deal with hoods for digital, increasing their length or whatever it takes to provide the right amount of flare protection.

Canon wants to sell us new lenses, and the shift to digital and crop factors is the perfect opportunity. I am interested to see what comes out of Photokina.

Have Fun,

[CoolToolGuy]

Granted, the DSLR was a major factor in its development, but at this time, I don't think Canon's going to make anything "L" exclusively for the EF-S mount. I would think that they'd lose a good chunk of the "L"-type customers that way.


I have just two words for you - Powershot Pro1. Let's face it - many L lenses are sold to folks just because they're L lenses, not because they are needed by their buyers. The 1.6 factor will be around for quite a while, and if Canon thinks they can make money selling EF-S L lenses, you can bet they will crank up the production line. The market for the consumer lenses is bigger than the market for the pro stuff, regardless of how many white lenses are on the sidelines of major sports events.

But time will tell. I could be wrong.

Have Fun,