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 05 Oct 2007 (Friday) 17:53
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "What is your recommendation for me"
EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS USM
49
90.7%
EF-S 17-85mm f4/5.6 IS USM
5
9.3%

54 voters, 54 votes given (1 choice only choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS USM Vs 17-85mm f4/5.6 IS USM

 
rkkwan
Member
134 posts
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Hong Kong
     
Oct 06, 2007 09:49 as a reply to  @ post 4075385 |  #16

I had the 17-85. Sold it and got the 17-55. I think there are quite a few of us who did this, but I hardly heard of anybody doing the reverse.

I think that alone tells a lot. If you can afford the 17-55, then buy it instead of the 17-85 because if you get the latter, you'll still be thinking about the 17-55 all the time.  :p


rkkwan.zenfolio.com (external link)
5D/BG-E4; 70-200/2.8L IS II, Sigma 8-16, Tamron 28-75 Asph, Tokina 10-17 Fish, 1.4x III; 580EX II; G7 X
Full Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
71sbeetle
Goldmember
Avatar
3,482 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 773
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV
     
Oct 06, 2007 11:34 as a reply to  @ rkkwan's post |  #17

what I meant on the IS is that at the same focal length and aperture setting in the exact same environment I can shoot at a slower speed on my 17-85IS than on the 17-55IS which I thought was weird !


gareymartin.com (external link)
flickr (external link)
gear list | CPS.
Feedback:
eBay (external link) | POTN
VWVortex (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Overkill
Goldmember
Avatar
1,062 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Amsterdam Netherlands
     
Oct 06, 2007 12:07 |  #18

71sbeetle wrote in post #4075894 (external link)
what I meant on the IS is that at the same focal length and aperture setting in the exact same environment I can shoot at a slower speed on my 17-85IS than on the 17-55IS which I thought was weird !

Cant be correct... unless youve got a faulty 17-55 or a Heavenly 17-85 (but the last one doesnt exist)!;)


Canon EOS 40D Gripped / 20D Gripped, EF 70-200 2.8L, [COLOR=black]EF 100-400 IS USM L, EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS USM, EF-S 10-22 USM, Sigma 105mm 2.8 EX Macro, Kenko 2XTC DG Kenko 1.4TC DG, Kenko Extension Tubes DG 12-20, Canon Speedlite 580EX, Manfrotto Tripod!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Overkill
Goldmember
Avatar
1,062 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Amsterdam Netherlands
     
Oct 06, 2007 12:09 |  #19

SHULTSIE!!! wrote in post #4074977 (external link)
Wait, the 17-55 is a Ford Focus?
[GIFS ARE NOT RENDERED IN QUOTES]

Corrected!


Canon EOS 40D Gripped / 20D Gripped, EF 70-200 2.8L, [COLOR=black]EF 100-400 IS USM L, EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS USM, EF-S 10-22 USM, Sigma 105mm 2.8 EX Macro, Kenko 2XTC DG Kenko 1.4TC DG, Kenko Extension Tubes DG 12-20, Canon Speedlite 580EX, Manfrotto Tripod!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
keithk42
Member
Avatar
59 posts
Joined Sep 2005
     
Oct 06, 2007 12:19 |  #20

I had the 17-85 IS for about 8 months. I sold it a couple of weeks ago and got a 17-55.

The 17-55 is worth the extra money in my opinion. The 17-55 is optically superior and produces much sharper images all the way around. The extra speed is a bonus both indoors and outside. I also find that I get better, more consistent exposure with the 17-55.

The 17-85 is a good lens, the 17-55 is an outstanding lens. It was worth it to me to have the superior image quality for the lens that lived on my camera most of the time.

Keith


Keith
Canon 60D, Canon EF-S 17-55 IS (w/ B&W CPL), Canon 15-85IS, Canon EF 70-300 IS, Speedlite 430 EX, Canon G11

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
71sbeetle
Goldmember
Avatar
3,482 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 773
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV
     
Oct 06, 2007 12:24 |  #21

Overkill wrote in post #4076004 (external link)
Cant be correct... unless youve got a faulty 17-55 or a Heavenly 17-85 (but the last one doesnt exist)!;)

well I went thru several 17-85s before I found the right one, and as for as IQ between it and the 17-55 I have .... not much difference, I'm heading out now for a little cruise and pics so I'll take some comparison shots ;)


gareymartin.com (external link)
flickr (external link)
gear list | CPS.
Feedback:
eBay (external link) | POTN
VWVortex (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phonetic
The Man MkIII in Hand
Avatar
315 posts
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
     
Oct 06, 2007 12:25 |  #22

Go for either 24-70L (my favorite) or 24-105L.

I really dislike the color rendition on both the 17-55 and 17-85 (actually all EF-S lenses). The 17-55 is very sharp though, but thats just about the only positive thing I can say about it.


Canon EOS 5D III
Canon EF 35 f/1.4L USM | Canon EF 16-35 f/2.8L II USM
Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L USM | Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L II IS USM
Canon 580 EX II / 580 EX / ST-E2 Speedlite

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
harrydog
Member
146 posts
Joined May 2003
     
Oct 06, 2007 13:13 |  #23

I have the 17-85 which I bought when I picked up my 30D over a year ago. At the time I was making the transition from film (Nikon) to digital and didn't know anything about Canon lenses. The 17-85 really isn't a bad lens and is capable of producing great shots, but the 17-55 is better, but should be, based on the cost. The IQ is very good, but for the cost I don't think the build quality is quite as high as it should be.
I'm going to pass on the 17-55 and get the 24-105 L. I think it has better color and saturation than the 17-55. Even on the 30D, for me, 24mm is wide enough and the longer reach on the other end is very useful. 55mm is just too limiting for me as a walk around lens.
Plus, the way the technology and manufacturing is evolving I really think most serious photographers will eventually end up with a FF camera at some point in the future, as prices will continue to come down. I know I will. No more EF-S lenses for me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
divinemethod
Senior Member
Avatar
536 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Oct 06, 2007 13:19 |  #24

used them both... kept the 17-55.


~Siva
Gear List | My Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Citizensmith
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,387 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 8
Joined Dec 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA USA
     
Oct 06, 2007 13:19 |  #25

Lightstream wrote in post #4074304 (external link)
Had both, kept 17-85 IS. Says a lot :)

No it doesn't. :) It could, but you didn't explain your decision. You are the only person who chose the 17-85 over the 17-55 in this thread. It'd be interesting to hear why.


My POTN Gallery, Complete gear list,
Tradition - Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
Avatar
20,887 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Birmingham, UK
     
Oct 06, 2007 13:34 |  #26

Phonetic wrote in post #4076057 (external link)
Go for either 24-70L (my favorite) or 24-105L.

I really dislike the color rendition on both the 17-55 and 17-85 (actually all EF-S lenses). The 17-55 is very sharp though, but thats just about the only positive thing I can say about it.

Yup ... the 17-55 IS is a good third place. It is a pretty good lens optically, I have one, but still a plasticky Canon consumer lens. Like for like good copies and the two L's spank the EFS IMO for 'pop and life' realism. The 17-85 IS is a decent but mediocre lens. Used one a few years ago with view to purchase and I knew immediately it didn't have what it takes and the many user reviews at FM confirm it. Even saying all the above ... the differences between most decent lenses is pretty small unless you're very picky. I'd much rather have a faster zoom that is cheaper, like the Tamron or Sigma's than the 17-85 IS.

Citizensmith wrote in post #4076272 (external link)
No it doesn't. :) It could, but you didn't explain your decision. You are the only person who chose the 17-85 over the 17-55 in this thread. It'd be interesting to hear why.

I thought the same ... ;) I think his was faulty or summat!


https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1203740

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

2,190 views & 0 likes for this thread
EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS USM Vs 17-85mm f4/5.6 IS USM
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 Dirtstar
844 guests, 213 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.