17-85 is

Just wondering what your opinions are on this lens.
I was thinking of the 17-55 but just had a baby and cant afford it right now.
I think that I heard that this lens feels kind of cheap.
Any info would be much appreciated.
Thanks, Dave

This was the 2nd lens I bought after I got my 20D. You will, no doubt, get mixed reviews regarding this lens. I have been very happy with its performance as an outdoor "walk around" lens. Good focal length range, decent IQ , IS, and not too expensive. Quite a few used ones available.

It's my walkabout lens, and I'm quite happy with it. Not L build quality, but not cheap feeling either. Like runninmann said, you're going to get mixed opinions on this lens.

Mine is a great copy I guess. It is hard to tell the difference between my 17-85 and 24-70 as far as sharpness. They each have their own qualities. The 24-70 is by far the better built and overall better performer but my 17-85 is a very nice lens as well. My only complaint is the lint that has gotten into the 17-85. It doesn't affect the images but bothers me just the same...like an eyelash on someone's cheek...you just want to brush it away!

I've owned three of these. All were sharpest at 35-85mm. One came as a kit lens with my 20d. Then bought one used on eBay for my daughter and it was full of dust but was still very sharp. Sold it anyway. Bought her another one new. Both new lenses went to Canon to fix front-focus at 17-24mm. Canon took two attempts on each lens to fix the problem. Unless asked, they seem to concentrate on getting the long end to focus properly. Both are now excellent performers, equal to my excellent 24-105 L in the 50-85mm range but a little softer at wider focal lengths but still quite sharp. In my opinion, this is the best all around EF-S lens once it is calibrated to properly autofocus. Although the new 17-55 f2.8 may be a little sharper from 17-55 and will work in lower light, this lens is half- the price, smaller and lighter and is definitely superior from 56-85mm.

Ya I think I might get it.
I do like the fact that iot does go to 85mm and I found one barely used for 500 canadian
At that price, I really can't lose.
Thanks, Dave

I think sigma 17-70 maybe a better option.
Both are reviewed on photozone.de

bmynbr wrote in post #2015431
Ya I think I might get it.
I do like the fact that iot does go to 85mm and I found one barely used for 500 canadian
At that price, I really can't lose.
Thanks, Dave

For that price you really can't lose.

I'm quite happy with mine, and while the 17-55 is oh so tempting I simply can't justify the price for an EF-S lens. If/when they start showing up used in the $750 to $800 range on FM I might rationalize it...

If you're going to use the 17-85 indoors plan on picking up a decent flash and diffuser (Stofen et al), it makes a huge difference in just how versatile the lens can get. Outdoors in good light the lens is darn near unbeatable as an all around "family" lens.

28-75 2.8 or 17-50 2.8, much better for low light, AND cheaper, AND sharper!