17-55 IS Surgery

Basically if the lens was still under warranty then i wouldn't do it.

I agree with lxon. BUT if you are careful, you can reassemble it so that it seems untouched. The trickiest part is having the seal back in the same place. The seal receives an imprint on it's sticky side from where it sticks to. So, if it is put back differently, it will receive a new overlap pattern. So Canon MAY see that the seal has been lifted? Though this is very minor. Other than that, you can't really tell it has been opened.

totally off topic but just noticed something looking at those pics i took of the lens they were done on a Sony K800i they come out pretty dam good considering it a mobile phone.

Thanks for posting this !! I don't have a real dust issue yet, but it was bothering me that I was eventually going to have to send mine away to have it removed. There were times when I was hesitant to use the lens because of potential dust in the air. You have made my day.

You guys are a bad influence I have a 17-85 is that took a fall last year while wearing a uv filter. Fortunately the uv filter took most of the impact and the lens is still sharp but there a few bits of glass on the element that have been bugging me but don't impact the iq... hmmmmm... tempting project for a cold winter night. Oh yeah and it is out of warranty.

Ixon wrote in post #4656378
totally off topic but just noticed something looking at those pics i took of the lens they were done on a Sony K800i they come out pretty dam good considering it a mobile phone.

i had a K750i, and that was pretty darn good for a cell phone. although not quite as good as the picture you posted.

HI all, first time posting.

Came across this as I dropped my very trusty 17-55 and the blades are screwed shut tighter than my eyes when I don't get out early on a powder day at Mt Hotham.

My 40D Af will not move the lense focus.
On MF, when I actuate, I get a "Comms Err 69" ("between lense and camera").

On my gf's 400D it actuates without error on MF and works on AF too!

Anyway, I found this useful, but not for me.
I also tried unscrewing the other end to see if I can remove the aperture unit from the body and see what was going on - has anyone ever tried that?

I probably will just send it to Canon and if no joy, either get another one (as they're a great lense), try insurance, or get a 24-70 for when I eventually get a FF 5dMkII or 1D.

Thanks!

tim

I've had one dropped 17-55 written off by Canon, and replaced under insurance. It's up in the cupboard, I should pull it apart some time, just for the hell of it.

I opened my out-of-warranty EF-S 17-85 last night using the abovereferenced procedure to clean dust out, and had great success. Took about 10 minutes.

Dave

I just bought a used 17-55 the other day (basically mint cond), and literally as I was walking out the door after the transaction, I dropped the lens! The "protective" UV filter on the front shattered and there were tiny shards of filter glass all over the front element. As I was cleaning the front element, I noticed that a shocking amount of tiny shards made it inside the lens (it looked *horrible*), and I also noticed how poor the "seal" was -- the adhesive didn't really hold anything down except at three spots, and everywhere else it was basically loose (I think this is why this lens is a "dust magnet"). I thought about unscrewing the assembly to clean things out, but thought I'd better research more. I found this thread and it gave me the confidence to open it up, and everything went flawlessly. I was able to blow all the shards out, and now you would never know there was anything inside the lens. No focusing/sharpness problems either. A big THANK YOU, for posting this -- It saved me ~125 bucks for a Canon cleaning, and being as I'm naturally inclined to tinkering/hacking, it was extremely satisfying to do it on my own.

dimockd wrote in post #8091611
I just bought a used 17-55 the other day (basically mint cond), and literally as I was walking out the door after the transaction, I dropped the lens! The "protective" UV filter on the front shattered and there were tiny shards of filter glass all over the front element. As I was cleaning the front element, I noticed that a shocking amount of tiny shards made it inside the lens (it looked *horrible*), and I also noticed how poor the "seal" was -- the adhesive didn't really hold anything down except at three spots, and everywhere else it was basically loose (I think this is why this lens is a "dust magnet"). I thought about unscrewing the assembly to clean things out, but thought I'd better research more. I found this thread and it gave me the confidence to open it up, and everything went flawlessly. I was able to blow all the shards out, and now you would never know there was anything inside the lens. No focusing/sharpness problems either. A big THANK YOU, for posting this -- It saved me ~125 bucks for a Canon cleaning, and being as I'm naturally inclined to tinkering/hacking, it was extremely satisfying to do it on my own.

I'd like to ask you what you think of a UV filter as protection against shock (not dust, as it obviously protects against that for this lens). Do you think your front element would have broken or got scratched had you not used a filter? That is, do you think the filter afforded some physical protection against impact?

mrkgoo wrote in post #8091668
I'd like to ask you what you think of a UV filter as protection against shock (not dust, as it obviously protects against that for this lens). Do you think your front element would have broken or got scratched had you not used a filter? That is, do you think the filter afforded some physical protection against impact?

Ah, the age old question... my opinion on the matter is that filters don't provide any real protection for impact-type damage. And in this case, all it did was create a huge mess when it shattered.

The lens cap was on, so there wouldn't have been anything directly hitting the front element. And I don't think the front element would have been damaged even w/o the cap, but you could make a case that the plastic housing may have been damaged had the metal ring of the filter not been there to absorb some impact. But then again, the metal on the filter got dented and it was a big pain to get the filter off (i had to fatigue it with pliers and pull it out, there was no chance of unscrewing it) and there was still some minor damage to the plastic threads.

dimockd wrote in post #8092035
Ah, the age old question... my opinion on the matter is that filters don't provide any real protection for impact-type damage. And in this case, all it did was create a huge mess when it shattered.

The lens cap was on, so there wouldn't have been anything directly hitting the front element. And I don't think the front element would have been damaged even w/o the cap, but you could make a case that the plastic housing may have been damaged had the metal ring of the filter not been there to absorb some impact. But then again, the metal on the filter got dented and it was a big pain to get the filter off (i had to fatigue it with pliers and pull it out, there was no chance of unscrewing it) and there was still some minor damage to the plastic threads.

I'm of the same camp, but I was just wondering what your impression was, since you had an impact and a destroyed filter. I'm guessing the filter for this was for dust exclusively. ( do the same.

There should be a DIY page for all lens removal

What kind of adhesive to use when the seal isnt sticky anymore after a few lenscleanings?