EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM?

I am looking at getting a lens that can do 2.8.

I have a 650D/T4i. I have been looking at the 40mm pancake, but its fixed range and no IS are giving me sour grapes. I shoot mostly handheld. I know it has gotten great reviews and for the price you can't really beat it.

However, the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM has got some pretty good reviews, and has the advantage of more range and IS. The price point is in a totally different league, of course.

If you didn't have either lenses and had the budget for the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM wouldn't it make more sense to get it over a fixed 40mm that can do the same 2.8.

Any thoughts?

EDIT: Ooops, I should have put this in the Canon EF and EF-S Lenses section. Sorry!

We have both lenses and hands down the wife loves her Canon 17-55mm lens, so do I when I'm allowed to use it. The 40mm lens is very good too but (IMO) but as good as the 17-55. We bought the 40mm lens because we (meaning my wife) are planning to upgrade her T1i to a T4i and the 40mm is designed for the T4i video.

If I got either lens, I would be using for video as well. It seems the only advantage the 40mm has for video is noise levels and auto focus, but if you are going to replace the sound or use an external mic than the noise on a non-STM isn't really a issue. And I always shoot manual anyway for video focus.

It's some great glass, it really is an "L" lens in all but name only. Nice sharp lens, you can shoot it wide open @f/2.8 without worry.

It's disadvantage of course is the price. For a much lower pricetag you can get a comparable 17-50 Tamron lens that is just as fast and as sharp, the only caveat is it lacks a stabilizer (IS in Canon terms).

Personally I can say I plunked down the money for the Canon and I have no regrets.

Yes, 2.8 is mainly what I want. And while the price point of the 40mm pancake is hard to avoid, it just makes more sense in my mind to spend some more and get the added advantage of IS, more range, and no doubt a higher quality build over the 40mm pancake.

Like the 15-85mm, it's L lens quality in optics and sharpness. But not in build quality or weather sealing. I don't think you'll be disappointed with the 17-55mm it's one of the best lens out there for crop camera standard zoom.

Mornnb wrote in post #14954922
Like the 15-85mm, it's L lens quality in optics and sharpness. But not in build quality or weather sealing. I don't think you'll be disappointed with the 17-55mm.

I was looking at the 15-85mm. Even more range, but unfortunately it lacks 2.8. This would be the ultimate lens if it could do 2.8.

I have a EFS 55-250 IS, and it serves me well if I need such range beyond 55, which I usually don't.

BatJoe wrote in post #14954717
If you didn't have either lenses and had the budget for the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM wouldn't it make more sense to get it over a fixed 40mm that can do the same 2.8.

Yes.

I bought a 17-55 f/2.8 two months ago, and I love it. It stays on the camera full time. The IS is whisper quiet, and the AF is fast. My only regret is that it is an EF-S lens. I want to go FF in the future and I will have to replace it.

Regards,

Rick

I bought the 17-55 after some great advice on this forum and can honestly say it is the best bit of glass I own. Get it, you won't regret it

alazgr8 wrote in post #14956294
My only regret is that it is an EF-S lens. I want to go FF in the future and I will have to replace it.

Or just keep your crop camera. That's what I did.

I have just got the 17-55IS to replace my 15-85IS, which in turn replaced a 4 year old 17-55IS.
I did order the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non VC last night but cancelled the order this morning and went for the Canon.
Even though the Tamron is good (my copy was replaced with the 17-55IS when it came out) its not in the same league as the Canon, although IQ is very close.
The way i see it is the Canon is the best, and getting another lens would still leave me open to wanting the Canon, so i might as well hit the top first time (or second in my case).

One reason i got rid of my first 17-55Is was that the IS was noisy. Not a problem for stills but when shooting hand held video, and suing the internal mic the Is noise could be picked up. Not so the 15-85IS.
Interesting comment from Rick about it being whisper quiet. Have they changed the IS system?

The 17-55 is my primary portrait lens. It's very sharp if you stop it down to F4 or smaller. I personally don't feel it's as sharp wide open. It did help a LOT when I got the 7d and could micro adjust it (originally bought it when I only had a 30d).

The zoom is starting to get a little sticky on mine, and I see some dust inside it (nothing that shows up on the images, yet). Probably needs to get cleaned.

As others have said, the AF is nearly silent, and it works very quickly and reliably.

I haven't used the 40mm, so I can't comment on that one.

dave_bass5 wrote in post #14956545
Interesting comment from Rick about it being whisper quiet. Have they changed the IS system?

He probably hasn't used it to shoot video. The IS on my 15-85 is much quieter than my 24-105 when shooting video. The 17-55 and 24-105 have similar sounding IS.

Here is a video showing the 17-55 IS noise being picked up by the camera's mic. http://youtu.be/PezKZ1​Bu8vc?t=56s

It looks like from your sig, you already have the 17-55?