With all the 7DMkII rumors, how about a 17-55mm f2.8 MkII?

andrikos wrote in post #17065703
http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2010-02-08#more

4 years old

Hermelin wrote in post #17065713
4 years old

I've heard products take 3-5 years to hit the market after a patent filing so it might be the time. Would be cool if they announced the 7D MKII along with the ef-s 17-55 f2.0 IS together.

I would give a lot of money for 17-55 f/2.0 IS.

Wouldn't that be a huge lens though? I could do without the IS in exchange for smaller size.

If they really make a 17-55 f/2, a lot of primes for crop would be pointless though now? Like 35 f/2? Or maybe the 17-55 f/2 would be so much more expensive that people who wouldn't want/can't spend that money would get the 35 f/2 instead.

Hermelin wrote in post #17065741
I would give a lot of money for 17-55 f/2.0 IS.

Wouldn't that be a huge lens though? I could do without the IS in exchange for smaller size.

If they really make a 17-55 f/2, a lot of primes for crop would be pointless though now? Like 35 f/2? Or maybe the 17-55 f/2 would be so much more expensive that people who wouldn't want/can't spend that money would get the 35 f/2 instead.

I'd probably buy it the day they announced it.

delta0014 wrote in post #17065749
I'd probably buy it the day they announced it.

Just read this:

http://www.canonrumors​.com …-splash-at-photokina-cr2/

"We’re told that at least one EF-S lens is possible"

7D mkII and a ef-s 17-55 f2.0 IS announced in september and sold as a kit. Price??

While I have this lens and carry it in the bag. It's just never grown on me. If anything I use it as an afterthought. While I know it's mostly what I'm shooting, the focal length just doesn't really work for me. With the long end of 55 being just too short. I'll use my 50 1.4 more than the 17-55. It's a great lens though just not for me.

jorkata wrote in post #17047455
The 17-55 is a great lens but too big and heavy for a hobbyist, IMO.
That's why I sold mine after six years of use.

My preference would be for a new 16-50/f4 IS lens (EF-S).
Presumably smaller and lighter than the 17-55 - but with the same high image quality.
And with the build quality of the 15-85 or better.

You think the 17-55 is big and heavy??? ROFL!

Hermelin wrote in post #17065741
I would give a lot of money for 17-55 f/2.0 IS.

If it does come to fruition, you're going to have to if you want it.

Hermelin wrote in post #17065741
I would give a lot of money for 17-55 f/2.0 IS.

Wouldn't that be a huge lens though? I could do without the IS in exchange for smaller size.

Just buy the 6D and 24-70II.
Mission accomplished.

Yes, it would seem that a 17-55mm f/2 would be a heavy lens. But for someone who has been known to run around a concert hall with 200mm f/2 or 300mm f/2.8 s and handhold them for a whole concert, I think I could deal with it.

It's all relative.

andrikos wrote in post #17066249
Just buy the 6D and 24-70II.
Mission accomplished.

That "just" = $ 4200

skifurthur wrote in post #17067066
Yes, it would seem that a 17-55mm f/2 would be a heavy lens. But for someone who has been known to run around a concert hall with 200mm f/2 or 300mm f/2.8 s and handhold them for a whole concert, I think I could deal with it.

It's all relative.

I could deal with it considering how much that lens would cover. There would be no need for a prime within the 17-55mm range, such as the 35 f/2 and 50 f/1.8, etc.

If it doesn't weigh more than 1kg, I say it's worth it (for me).

I guess it would be too much to hope for an announcement at photokina for this lens?

Hermelin wrote in post #17069667
I guess it would be too much to hope for an announcement at photokina for this lens?

I would guess so because this is more of a wish than a rumor.