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

Monster in the air

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

just joined the EF-S 17-55 camp will post photos soon!

deanedward wrote in post #14673016
just joined the EF-S 17-55 camp will post photos soon!

Enjoy. I trust this lens more than any other to get the shot.

KayakPhotos wrote in post #14672068
I can't specifically speak to shooting shows, but I've shot plenty of action shots and it never failed me. The 17-55 might be the fastest focusing lens I've ever shot actually...

I agree, it's lightening fast. I was kind of disappointed when I bought my 70-200 II when I saw the AF speed of it. I know I'm nit picking, but as I had been using the 17-55 a lot leading up to my purchase, I was suprised it couldn't keep up with the 17-55 after all I'd heard about it. ( saying that I still love it though )
Buy the lens, it's magnificent

Hi everyone, here a new shot:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/13609536@N05/7​509904970/

h14nha wrote in post #14674397
I agree, it's lightening fast. I was kind of disappointed when I bought my 70-200 II when I saw the AF speed of it. I know I'm nit picking, but as I had been using the 17-55 a lot leading up to my purchase, I was suprised it couldn't keep up with the 17-55 after all I'd heard about it. ( saying that I still love it though )
Buy the lens, it's magnificent

Would you say the 17-55 is accurate in low light / "not as contrasty as you would like" situations? ISO 3200, f2.8, 1/160 kind of situations with light behind the subject? I was shooting a show with my Sigma 30 and the hunting and little variances in accuracy were a little frustrating. Thinking about picking this lens up today... hopefully I can atleast throw it on my camera and see how I like it. A lot of the shots in this thread are wonderful!

It'll be real nice to finally pick up a decent event lens!

GrendelZ wrote in post #14650861
A few from our trip to Panama City Beach. Taken with the 7D 17-55 2.8IS

Nice series... on a side note, your avatar is so darn

digital_AM wrote in post #14556920

HDR?
looks superbly nice!
i had tried to take these type of picture, but i can only captured either the building or the sky...

how did u do that?

cool79 wrote in post #14684562
HDR?
looks superbly nice!
i had tried to take these type of picture, but i can only captured either the building or the sky...

how did u do that?

Thank you! It's not HDR actually. It was all processed in Lightroom. I underexposed by a bit to avoid blowing out the sky completely. Then I bumped up the black and shadows to bring up the rest of the scene. Then I used some adjustment brushes on the temple to bring out clarity and sharpness. I did use center weighted metering for this shot. I think shooting 7 exposures to achieve a tone mapped image would have worked too. Just a bit more work.

Another example but on this one I didn't underexpose since the sky was nice and blue.

touji wrote in post #14675683
Would you say the 17-55 is accurate in low light / "not as contrasty as you would like" situations? ISO 3200, f2.8, 1/160 kind of situations with light behind the subject? I was shooting a show with my Sigma 30 and the hunting and little variances in accuracy were a little frustrating. Thinking about picking this lens up today... hopefully I can atleast throw it on my camera and see how I like it. A lot of the shots in this thread are wonderful!

It'll be real nice to finally pick up a decent event lens!

Any accuracy issues will have to do with the user or camera defficiencies. I've had a chance to shoot with a lot of lenses, some very expensive, and this one stacks up. It does well in low light as well.

Thanks for the reply. I've been reading that the Canon is more "accurate" than the Sigma in low light so I guess that comment isn't entirely "accurate"?

I am seriously debating keeping this lens and getting rid of my 15-85mm. My only gripe is the fact that this lens is a dust magnet. It doesn't show up in pictures and it is easy to clean from the youtube videos I have seen. Does filter help reduce the dust or not with this lens ? Would love to hear input from fellow POTN members.

digital_AM wrote in post #14685378
Thank you! It's not HDR actually. It was all processed in Lightroom. I underexposed by a bit to avoid blowing out the sky completely. Then I bumped up the black and shadows to bring up the rest of the scene. Then I used some adjustment brushes on the temple to bring out clarity and sharpness. I did use center weighted metering for this shot. I think shooting 7 exposures to achieve a tone mapped image would have worked too. Just a bit more work.

Another example but on this one I didn't underexpose since the sky was nice and blue.

may I have a look at the unedited picture? so I would get a picture of how it was shot in the camera.

ateet wrote in post #14685745
I am seriously debating keeping this lens and getting rid of my 15-85mm. My only gripe is the fact that this lens is a dust magnet. It doesn't show up in pictures and it is easy to clean from the youtube videos I have seen. Does filter help reduce the dust or not with this lens ? Would love to hear input from fellow POTN members.

I'd like to say no. You can still feel the zoom sucking in air after attaching a filter.
But dust is not an issue. This lens worth every penny of it.

cool79 wrote in post #14686165
may I have a look at the unedited picture? so I would get a picture of how it was shot in the camera.

Sure, no problem.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO