Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 06 May 2008 (Tuesday) 16:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

17-55mm f/2.8 instead 35mm f/1,4 ?

 
MarkTH
Member
70 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Poland
     
May 06, 2008 16:01 |  #1

I read this thread: https://photography-on-the.net …?t=498742&highl​ight=17-55
and other threads about 17-55mm f2,8 and I am nice supprised

..and what is your opinion ?

...maybe it is more practical at near the same quality would be 17-55mmf2,8 with IS , instead of: 35mm f1.4
?
Regards
Mark.


Canon: 5D MkII | 35 f/1,4 L | 100mm Macro f/2.8 IS L | 24-105mm f/4 IS L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS |...| 580 ExII, 430Ex Speedlite | Velbon Sherpa 750R | B+W MRC filters UV | Kenko Ext Tube | Epson P-5000 | LowePro backpack | 27" Dell | CS3 | LR2.4
My small PHOTO gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
jklewer
Goldmember
Avatar
1,292 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2007
Location: 34N 118W
     
May 06, 2008 16:17 |  #2

It really depends on what you're going to be using it for. I used to own the 17-55, and now own the Sigma 30 1.4 (similar to 35 1.4 for comparison) and I would certainly take the 17-55 if I only could have one. However, the creativity inherent with primes is something I love...


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nicksan
Man I Like to Fart
Avatar
24,729 posts
Likes: 42
Joined Oct 2006
Location: NYC
     
May 06, 2008 16:26 as a reply to  @ jklewer's post |  #3

I see the 2 serving different purposes.
The 17-55 IS is certainly a fantastic piece of glass.

However the 35L is really meant for low light as well as achieving the DoF that only f1.4 can get you. It's also sharp wide open, and unlike something like the 50 1.8, it doesn't have to be stopped down to be useful.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MarkTH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
70 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Poland
     
May 06, 2008 17:06 |  #4

I suppose , when I decide to buy the 17-55 f2,8 my 24-105 L will be useless ;-)a
Do you agree with my suspicious, looking at my rear ? (For longer focus my 70-300 IS wil be perfect)
Also 17-55 may by more "useful" in many different situations like shooting my family, vacations.. , hmm..


Canon: 5D MkII | 35 f/1,4 L | 100mm Macro f/2.8 IS L | 24-105mm f/4 IS L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS |...| 580 ExII, 430Ex Speedlite | Velbon Sherpa 750R | B+W MRC filters UV | Kenko Ext Tube | Epson P-5000 | LowePro backpack | 27" Dell | CS3 | LR2.4
My small PHOTO gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,059 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 412
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
May 06, 2008 17:17 |  #5

nicksan wrote in post #5473253 (external link)
I see the 2 serving different purposes.
The 17-55 IS is certainly a fantastic piece of glass.

However the 35L is really meant for low light as well as achieving the DoF that only f1.4 can get you. It's also sharp wide open, and unlike something like the 50 1.8, it doesn't have to be stopped down to be useful.

i didn't find the 35 1.4 to be sharp wide open...or particularly usable unless you had no other choice.

i'd say at f2 the prime may be as sharp as the 17-55 @ f2.8.

and the 17-55 has 3-stop IS.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MarkTH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
70 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Poland
     
May 06, 2008 17:22 |  #6

ed rader, the information you wrote (known as I see from practice are like a diamond for my knowledge ) :-) Thanks a lot.

For flexibiliy and maximum sharpness, quality (I understand ) would you choose 17-55 insead of 35 prime ? I only worry a little about the colours in 17-55 ( comparing to prime 35f1,4 ) ...


Canon: 5D MkII | 35 f/1,4 L | 100mm Macro f/2.8 IS L | 24-105mm f/4 IS L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS |...| 580 ExII, 430Ex Speedlite | Velbon Sherpa 750R | B+W MRC filters UV | Kenko Ext Tube | Epson P-5000 | LowePro backpack | 27" Dell | CS3 | LR2.4
My small PHOTO gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,059 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 412
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
May 06, 2008 17:27 |  #7

MarkTH wrote in post #5473577 (external link)
ed rader, the information you wrote (known as I see from practice are like a diamond for my knowledge ) :-) Thanks a lot.

For flexibiliy and maximum sharpness, quality (I understad ) would you choose 17-55 insead of 35 prime ? I only worry a little about the colours in 17-55 ( comparing to prime 35f1,4 ) ...

i found that the 17-55 is cooler in color than L lenses...the 35 1.4 has better color and contrast.

the prime is a great lens but the 17-55 is the best normal range zoom for a 1.6 crop camera....and i mean by a longshot.

i think the vast majority of shooters will find the 17-55 to be a much more useful lens :D.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MarkTH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
70 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Poland
     
May 06, 2008 17:36 |  #8

I found useful comparision test with photos - 17-55mm f2,8 lens with the other lens
http://www.pbase.com/t​mr4/canon_xti_testing (external link)
and take a look for next pages being over there. There is more... interesting tests as I see

maybe that link will be helpfull to somebody


Canon: 5D MkII | 35 f/1,4 L | 100mm Macro f/2.8 IS L | 24-105mm f/4 IS L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS |...| 580 ExII, 430Ex Speedlite | Velbon Sherpa 750R | B+W MRC filters UV | Kenko Ext Tube | Epson P-5000 | LowePro backpack | 27" Dell | CS3 | LR2.4
My small PHOTO gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MarkTH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
70 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Poland
     
May 06, 2008 18:44 |  #9

How big... would you describe the difference in quality of color beetwen this two lenses ? (c.a. 3-5 %, more ?, very small ?)
Thank you in advance


Canon: 5D MkII | 35 f/1,4 L | 100mm Macro f/2.8 IS L | 24-105mm f/4 IS L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS |...| 580 ExII, 430Ex Speedlite | Velbon Sherpa 750R | B+W MRC filters UV | Kenko Ext Tube | Epson P-5000 | LowePro backpack | 27" Dell | CS3 | LR2.4
My small PHOTO gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
oaktree
Goldmember
1,835 posts
Joined Mar 2007
     
May 06, 2008 20:54 |  #10

ed rader wrote in post #5473601 (external link)
i think the vast majority of shooters will find the 17-55 to be a much more useful lens :D.

ed rader

Count me in the majority! Fantastic lens! Just back from a vacation in Hawaii where I used the 17-55/2.8 about 98% of the time. And my other lens was a 135/2L!


Too much stuff, not enough shooting time.

Canon T4i (2 lenses), Fuji X100s, Olympus OM-D EM-1 (3 lenses)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,059 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 412
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
May 06, 2008 21:05 |  #11

MarkTH wrote in post #5473967 (external link)
How big... would you describe the difference in quality of color beetwen this two lenses ? (c.a. 3-5 %, more ?, very small ?)
Thank you in advance

it's not that noticeable or a deal killer and some swear the difference doesn't exist .... but i can see it :D.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MarkTH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
70 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Poland
     
May 07, 2008 01:24 |  #12

All your answers are very helpful. The decision is almost made. :-) / 17-55 f2,8 instead 35L prime.
Thanks again.


Canon: 5D MkII | 35 f/1,4 L | 100mm Macro f/2.8 IS L | 24-105mm f/4 IS L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS |...| 580 ExII, 430Ex Speedlite | Velbon Sherpa 750R | B+W MRC filters UV | Kenko Ext Tube | Epson P-5000 | LowePro backpack | 27" Dell | CS3 | LR2.4
My small PHOTO gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MarkTH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
70 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Poland
     
May 07, 2008 01:46 |  #13

Here found excellent place to compare lenses - well prepared charts.
35L
http://www.slrgear.com …ct.php/product/​148/cat/10 (external link)
17-55 f2.8
http://www.slrgear.com …ct.php/product/​353/cat/11 (external link)

PS. Maybe the links will be usefull for others


Canon: 5D MkII | 35 f/1,4 L | 100mm Macro f/2.8 IS L | 24-105mm f/4 IS L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS |...| 580 ExII, 430Ex Speedlite | Velbon Sherpa 750R | B+W MRC filters UV | Kenko Ext Tube | Epson P-5000 | LowePro backpack | 27" Dell | CS3 | LR2.4
My small PHOTO gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Technophile
Senior Member
Avatar
298 posts
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Gilroy / Santa Cruz, CA
     
May 07, 2008 02:00 |  #14

i have both lenses, and see them serving different purposes. but still, my 35L gets more use, and i use the 35L at f1.4 probably 95% of the time. f2 is sharper, but the f1.4 sharpness is very good, and becomes even better with a little USM in photoshop. of course, the 17-55 isnt at its best sharpness wide open either...whatever way you look at it, they are both fantastically sharp lenses.


5D Mark II | Canon 16-35mm f2.8 L |Canon 24-70 f2.8 L | Canon 35 f1.4 L | Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS | Canon 135 f2.0 L | Canon 400 f5.6 L | Speedlite 430EX
Flickr Pics (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MarkTH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
70 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Poland
     
May 07, 2008 02:26 |  #15

Technophile
If the are very similar in sharpness , ( I think ) , I should take under consideration "the flexibility in purposes" / life ,
Do you agree with me ?

I shoot photos only for my pleasure (it is not my occupation)
and mainly I shoot photos (like in my gallery / in my foot) and my children (fast moving objects :-) ), family , outdoor nice views, during intl trips and so on.
Before your posts I had been afraid only that, it is a zoom , not a prime (worse quality of pictures ). Now everytking is much clear. :-) Thanks.


Canon: 5D MkII | 35 f/1,4 L | 100mm Macro f/2.8 IS L | 24-105mm f/4 IS L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS |...| 580 ExII, 430Ex Speedlite | Velbon Sherpa 750R | B+W MRC filters UV | Kenko Ext Tube | Epson P-5000 | LowePro backpack | 27" Dell | CS3 | LR2.4
My small PHOTO gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,274 views & 0 likes for this thread
17-55mm f/2.8 instead 35mm f/1,4 ?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is BillyCabral
1038 guests, 309 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.