Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 04 Mar 2011 (Friday) 14:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Why is the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS so expensive?

 
M.Quick
Senior Member
Avatar
441 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Europe
     
Mar 05, 2011 11:11 |  #46

xarqi wrote in post #11957540 (external link)
It is the price it is because that maximises Canon's profits.

Any cheaper and insufficiently more people would buy it to compensate for the potential revenue lost on each sale.
Any more expensive, and sales would drop eliminating the benefit of the higher price.

It's called "elasticity".
http://en.wikipedia.or​g …rice_elasticity​_of_demand (external link)


This is why!


My "cheap" pro-setup;
Canon EOS 450D | Canon 50mm f1.8 II | Canon EF 70-200L f2.8 IS USM | YN-468 v2
8GB SDHC Class10 | BG-E5 + 4xLP-E5 | RC-4 | Canon E1 | Lowepro Exchange Messenger bag

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Vertigo1
Senior Member
310 posts
Likes: 49
Joined Sep 2006
     
Mar 05, 2011 15:55 |  #47

LightRules wrote in post #11958773 (external link)
Pretty much the only thing the Canon 17-55 has over the Sigma 17-50 is AF speed and FTM override. Otherwise, you'll get 4 years warranty, AF accuracy is bang-on (as trustworthy as any 17-55 I've used and as accurate as my 70-200 f4 IS), more robust build (no dust, no known IS issues over time, no zoom creep), as good stabilizer (routinely get 4 stops gain), smaller, lighter, closer MFD and higher magnification, and optically at least as good (and better in many areas such as flare resistance).

Sorry but I've had two Sigma lenses and their quality control is a farce. If you've managed to bag a good one then congratulations but there's no guarantee anyone else will get one as good and they quite probably won't.

My 17-70 needed sending to Sigma UK for calibration as soon as I got it (new!) and my 24-60 f/2.8 was so soft at f/2.8 as to render it pointless. I'm sure many of their lenses do measure up but I'm never going near them again I'm afraid.


Canon 5D3/6D | EF 16-35 f/4L IS | EF 24-70 f/2.8L II | EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II | EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II | EF 35 f/1.4L II | EF 50 f/1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Mar 05, 2011 15:59 |  #48

Vertigo1 wrote in post #11962220 (external link)
Sorry but I've had two Sigma lenses and their quality control is a farce. If you've managed to bag a good one then congratulations but there's no guarantee anyone else will get one as good and they quite probably won't.

My 17-70 needed sending to Sigma UK for calibration as soon as I got it (new!) and my 24-60 f/2.8 was so soft at f/2.8 as to render it pointless. I'm sure many of their lenses do measure up but I'm never going near them again I'm afraid.

That's unfortunate. But I'm referring to the Sigma 17-50 f2.8 OS, not other Sigma lenses. And trust me, I've used a few lenses over the years...and many copies of the 17-55 f2.8 IS (which is a fine lens).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Darkwand
Goldmember
Avatar
1,850 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 22
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Åkersberga, Sweden
     
Mar 05, 2011 16:36 |  #49

The Canon 17-55 is stupidly sharp at f/2.8 and enough sharpness to dissolve the new sensors properly. I wouldn´t trust a Sigma at f/2.8.


Adrian My Flickr (external link)
Canon 6D, Canon 7D, Canon 500D, Canon 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 IS, 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM, 50mm f/1.4 USM, 85mm f/1,8 USM, Sigma 70-200mm HSM Macro, 10-20mm f/4-5,6

Manfrotto 055 CXPRO4 + 498RC2, Manfrotto 410 Junior, Elinchrom: RX1200, 2x BRX250 , Dlite-it 4 and 2, Canon 580EXII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Mar 05, 2011 16:48 |  #50

Darkwand wrote in post #11962398 (external link)
The Canon 17-55 is stupidly sharp at f/2.8 and enough sharpness to dissolve the new sensors properly. I wouldn´t trust a Sigma at f/2.8.

Care to elaborate?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Raylon
Goldmember
Avatar
1,078 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Plainfield, IL
     
Mar 05, 2011 16:49 |  #51

Darkwand wrote in post #11962398 (external link)
The Canon 17-55 is stupidly sharp at f/2.8 and enough sharpness to dissolve the new sensors properly. I wouldn´t trust a Sigma at f/2.8.

From what I've read the Sigma is actually sharper in the center than the Canon at 2.8. I've been deciding between the tamron non-vc, sigma, and canon. I think I've finally decided on the Sigma.


7D l Canon 70-200 f/4L IS l Canon 85mm f/1.8 l ∑ 17-50 f/2.8 l Canon 50mm f/1.8 II l S95
Full Gear List and Marketplace Feedback
My SmugMug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Indecent ­ Exposure
Goldmember
Avatar
3,402 posts
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Austin, Texas
     
Mar 05, 2011 17:01 |  #52

darobby wrote in post #11960085 (external link)
The 17-55 is definitely of "L" quality but Canon will non put an "L" designation on an EF-S lens.

Considering the new 70-300mm f/4-5.6L, I don't think Canon is as protective of the L branding as they have been in the past. Canon hasn't yet released an EF-S L because they haven't yet released an EF-S L.


- James -
www.feedthewant.com (external link)
500px (external link)
Gear List and Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Mar 05, 2011 17:06 |  #53

Raylon wrote in post #11962455 (external link)
From what I've read the Sigma is actually sharper in the center than the Canon at 2.8. I've been deciding between the tamron non-vc, sigma, and canon. I think I've finally decided on the Sigma.

That is correct, the Sigma is sharper in the center and similar at the edges.

Apart from my own findings, which by the way was one reason I sold my 17-55 f2.8 IS for the EX lens, Lenstip has a good review: http://www.lenstip.com …EX_DC_OS_HSM_Su​mmary.html (external link)

Their conclusion:
"Reading our test you can see very clearly that the Sigma entered the segment of more expensive fast zoom lenses, aimed at ambitious amateur photographers or even professionals working with smaller sensors, very aggressively indeed. The performance of the tested lens is sometimes really impressive. In the frame centre the Sigma behaves better than more expensive constructions of Canon and Nikon. At the edge it is worse than the Nikkor but it can compete on equal terms with the Canon. In fact it doesn’t lag behind the competitors in any category and in some it fares definitely better. Sigma lately has started to emphasize the fact that its aim is not only to produce cheap and worse substitutes of brand name lenses but also to reach a similar price-quality segment as its brand name competitors. The newest models, like the 1.4/50 or the Sigma 17-50 mm f/2.8 tested here, are perfect examples of this strategy.

The Sigma 17–50 mm is not a flawless device but neither are so its most serious competitors which are more expensive. The Nikkor overall seems to be an optically better lens but it is much more pricey than the Sigma and doesn’t feature image stabilization. The optics of the Sigma and the Canon are very similar – both boast silent and quick autofocus mechanism and stabilization. Sigma’s advantage consists of a better warranty and a bit lower price.

For the Sony Alfa system reflex cameras users the Sigma 17-50 mm can be a very interesting suggestion because Sony doesn’t offer such a lens in its line-up so the competition is definitely less fierce. It won’t be so easy in the case of Pentax because the 16-50 mm f/2.8 model from that company tempts with a wider angle of view although it is optically worse and more expensive than the Sigma.
To sum up the Sigma 17–50 mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM will find many satisfied users for sure. It would be difficult not to be satisfied when you can take photos as good as or even better than the brand name competitors using a cheaper lens."

After having used over 30 copies of the Canon 17-55 since its 2006 release, and owning 2 for the past 2.5 years, I've moved to the Sigma 17-50 because I think it is actually a better lens. Canon-only users will not be persuaded, but those with an open mind will find the Sigma very impressive.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,610 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2488
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Mar 05, 2011 17:27 |  #54

Canon adds $600 simply to include IS in a high quality lens...70-200 f/4L vs. 70-200 f/4L IS.

Imagine what a 24-70mm f/2.8L would cost if you added $600 to that lens for IS...(B&H NYC prices: $1300 + $600 = $1900.)

The 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is only $1100 at B&H, by comparison, a comparative bargain!


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Raylon
Goldmember
Avatar
1,078 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Plainfield, IL
     
Mar 05, 2011 17:33 |  #55

Wilt wrote in post #11962628 (external link)

The 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is only $1100 at B&H, by comparison, a comparative bargain!

It's still overpriced though...I would much rather save $450 and get the Sigma.


7D l Canon 70-200 f/4L IS l Canon 85mm f/1.8 l ∑ 17-50 f/2.8 l Canon 50mm f/1.8 II l S95
Full Gear List and Marketplace Feedback
My SmugMug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,610 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2488
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Mar 05, 2011 17:48 |  #56

Raylon wrote in post #11962666 (external link)
It's still overpriced though...I would much rather save $450 and get the Sigma.

Given the complaints on POTN and other forums about new lenses from Sigma needing to go back and be adjusted for focus, and given the complaints on POTN and other forums about older Sigma lenses not working on new models of Canon cameras, I'd rather not risk having to do battle with Sigma when disatisfied. They used to re-chip their lenses, but they no longer do that, to maintain compatibility of older lenses with newer bodies. No other brands of aftermarket lenses suffer the same complaints, that have been reported about Sigma. Be forewarned. I own other brands of aftermarket lenses, not Sigma...the issue is not being closed minded about aftermarket offerings, the issue is what others complain about that brand.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Raylon
Goldmember
Avatar
1,078 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Plainfield, IL
     
Mar 05, 2011 18:03 |  #57

Wilt wrote in post #11962726 (external link)
Given the complaints on POTN and other forums about new lenses from Sigma needing to go back and be adjusted for focus, and given the complaints on POTN and other forums about older Sigma lenses not working on new models of Canon cameras, I'd rather not risk having to do battle with Sigma when disatisfied. They used to re-chip their lenses, but they no longer do that, to maintain compatibility of older lenses with newer bodies. No other brands of aftermarket lenses suffer the same complaints, that have been reported about Sigma. Be forewarned. I own other brands of aftermarket lenses, not Sigma...the issue is not being closed minded about aftermarket offerings, the issue is what others complain about that brand.

The problem with Sigma's reputation is the only people posting are the ones having problems. I just picked up the Sigma 30mm and was praying to get a good copy. It was perfect. I have a feeling that most Sigma's will be perfectly fine. Also I plan on keeping my 7D for at least 3 to 5 years so I don't have to worry about that problem. If I can't use it with my next body I can simply place it on the market and sell it to someone who can use it.


7D l Canon 70-200 f/4L IS l Canon 85mm f/1.8 l ∑ 17-50 f/2.8 l Canon 50mm f/1.8 II l S95
Full Gear List and Marketplace Feedback
My SmugMug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Mar 05, 2011 18:17 |  #58

Wilt wrote in post #11962726 (external link)
Given the complaints on POTN and other forums about new lenses from Sigma needing to go back and be adjusted for focus, and given the complaints on POTN and other forums about older Sigma lenses not working on new models of Canon cameras, I'd rather not risk having to do battle with Sigma when disatisfied. They used to re-chip their lenses, but they no longer do that, to maintain compatibility of older lenses with newer bodies. No other brands of aftermarket lenses suffer the same complaints, that have been reported about Sigma. Be forewarned. I own other brands of aftermarket lenses, not Sigma...the issue is not being closed minded about aftermarket offerings, the issue is what others complain about that brand.

It's almost impossible to determine how legitimate the "Sigma issue" is. Too many newbies getting into the hobby, too many people "looking" for problems. But Sigma makes more AF lenses than all the 3rd party AF lens makers combined, so they do have more to account for. All makers have QC issues, Sigma included, but there are thousands upon thousands of satisfied amateurs and pros shooting them worldwide.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bokehlicious
Senior Member
Avatar
809 posts
Joined Jan 2011
     
Mar 05, 2011 18:33 as a reply to  @ LightRules's post |  #59

I personally "look" for problems on all the lenses that I buy but that's another story.
Lenses such as the 30 or 50 or even the 10-20(side softness) tend to be louder since they are "known" to be "defective". I didn't see any problem with the sigma 17-50 I had my hands on nor did I see any problem with the sigma 85 but the sigma 30...well that's something else and I'll complain somewhere else. With many people actually getting theirs fixed through calibration it just goes to show that in those cases, it's actually a Sigma QC problem and not user error. With the amount of "complaining" it still shows that the defective rate is probably higher than Canon since you don't see as much "Complaining" even though there is some.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pasukun
Goldmember
Avatar
1,388 posts
Joined Feb 2007
Location: US
     
Mar 05, 2011 18:35 |  #60

xarqi wrote in post #11957540 (external link)
It is the price it is because that maximises Canon's profits.

Any cheaper and insufficiently more people would buy it to compensate for the potential revenue lost on each sale.
Any more expensive, and sales would drop eliminating the benefit of the higher price.

It's called "elasticity".
http://en.wikipedia.or​g …rice_elasticity​_of_demand (external link)

Canon should rethink then. 17-55 IS's high price is the main reason why alternative lenses from Tamron and Sigma are doing so well. You still pay over a half grand for them, but it feels darn justified when you compare them to Canon 17-55 IS.

This is not a complain btw, it is just fine as it is.
I want Tamron and Sigma to succeed and make even better lenses.


"the things we touch have no permanence.. as there is nothing we can hold onto in this world.. only by letting it go can we truly possess what is real.."

My Gears

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,404 views & 0 likes for this thread
Why is the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS so expensive?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is roysdaughter
1430 guests, 346 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.