Canon EFS 17-55: QUIT ASKING PLEASE!!!

I owned the EFS 17-55 2.8 IS before I switched to full-frame.

People, quit asking about this lens already!!! I am getting sick of it.

Get a few things straight:

1. The EFS 17-55 is what ALMOST stopped me from switching to FF.
2. FF owners are still waiting for the FF equivalent of this lens. 24-70 2.8L IS anyone???
3. In my opinion, it is the BEST "walk-around" normal zoom available anywhere! Period. (I bought and sold the 24-105L for the 17-55!)
4. It is sharp, sharp, sharp. And fast, fast, fast!
5. Yes, it IS WORTH its asking price. JUST BUY IT ALREADY!
6. Build quality/dust issues are minor.

I decided to say the cash and buy the Tammy until 20 seconds ago....

wow wow wow wow wow!!!

Don't read the threads if they bother you. Ranting about it isn't going to stop the questions coming. Plus, its not quite as cut and dry as you make it sound. The sigma 17-50 OS gives the canon 17-55 a run for its money, and the tamron 17-50 non VC is also an extremely viable alternative.

so is the efs 17-55 2.8 is a good lens then? lol

Sirrith wrote in post #14976409
Don't read the threads if they bother you. Ranting about it isn't going to stop the questions coming. Plus, its not quite as cut and dry as you make it sound. The sigma 17-50 OS gives the canon 17-55 a run for its money, and the tamron 17-50 non VC is also an extremely viable alternative.

true. it's possible to have control over your own behavior but impossible to control the crushing mass of newbs .

that said, i know where you are coming from and that's why i spend so little time on this forum anymore.

ed rader wrote in post #14976428
snip... that's why i spend so little time on this forum anymore.

Says the man with 20,000 posts.

Do you really want newbies to be scared away from here?

SchnellerGT wrote in post #14976320
2. FF owners are still waiting for the FF equivalent of this lens. 24-70 2.8L IS anyone???

The equivalent is the 24-104/4 IS BTW

I use to own the 17-55IS way back when I had my 30D.. It was pretty stellar..
Switched to Nikon later and picked up the Tamron 17-50 Non VC..

Saw almost no difference in IQ, (Except in my pocket$$)

Just putting that out there..

Just so I have this right...you have a lens posted for sale and people are asking questions about it and this is irritating you enough to post a rant about it in the general section?

I have this lens and love it, but now that I am shooting more with the 5dMK III, I need to add something to replace it. Have a 17-40L, 24-105, might look at the new (or quality used 24-70) but really like having IS on a lens like this.

The re-asking of questions is part of any forum I have ever been a part of. Unfortunately, so is the pointless complaining about the re-asking of questions. Just don't read the thread and move on.

Do you think the 17-55 is better than Sigma's offering?

Lot of new folks don't know that. Heck I didn't this before I purchased my 15-85 and really got into photography. If I could do it all over again, I would get 17-55, 70-200 and be content. In a few days when this thread is on page 31, new users will be asking the same question all over again.