Canon EF-S 17-55mm F/2.8 IS USM

Black car theme!!! 54mm f/2.8

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

Here are a couple from the Wings Over Pittsburgh Air Show that I took on Saturday.

Trying out my new battery grip last night

A few from me:
(Oh how I love this lens)

37mm, f5.6, no sharpening

^^^cracker shot

My little guy 52mm f/2.8

Some pics from Marineland, Ontario, Canada....

Hi All, I'm planning to get a 17-55 2.8 is LENS in days,
One thing make me confused, do I need a B+W CPL or not?

You do not necessarily need a filter on any lens. Although a polarizing filter can be useful in many situations and any kind of filter can protect the lens front element.

jaymrobinson wrote in post #3501743
You do not necessarily need a filter on any lens. Although a polarizing filter can be useful in many situations and any kind of filter can protect the lens front element.

OK, Thanks.

starmage wrote in post #3501230
Hi All, I'm planning to get a 17-55 2.8 is LENS in days,
One thing make me confused, do I need a B+W CPL or not?

I use one on mine all the time except indoors. Plus it can also help protect the lens.

Back to birds (Herons make the perfect subjects.. they're large and hold very still while they're hunting for food):

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

starmage wrote in post #3501230
Hi All, I'm planning to get a 17-55 2.8 is LENS in days,
One thing make me confused, do I need a B+W CPL or not?

The Circular Polarizer (CPL) filter can be very handy, as it will blue up the sky, as well as help you eliminate glare/reflections off of non-metalic surfaces. It's not something you would leave on there day-to-day.

However, I am a believer in keeping a UV filter on the lens at all times. My 17-55 runs around with a B+W MRC UV filter and a hood. This is probably overkill, but it's a kilobuck lens so I'm not taking any chances.