17-85mm IS VS New 18-55mm IS

so Im buying my first lens. and I think im opretty set on the 17-85. but im reading alot and alot of people are saying the new 18-55IS is much better. I just dont know enough about lens to know the differences at this point and time. Can I get some feedback?

I'm using the 17-85mm as my main lens. I know you are reading alot of no so good reviews about the lens, but I think it is a fine lens for everyday use. It has the extra reach and much better build quality. If you are not going to analyze every pic you take down to the pixel, i think this is the one to go for.

Rent them and see for yourself...

My 17-85 is just fine.

Having had a 17-85 and having seen reviews/pics of the kit lens, I would say the kit lens is at the very minimum no worse than the 17-85 and in some regards better. At a price tag of more than 1/2 that of the 17-85, I would say to get the IS kit lens.

I have the 17-85 IS USM and I am pretty happy with it. Big distortion from 17 to around 22mm and rather slow for low light photos but, otherwise, a nice lens. Build quality is correct, it is lightweight, sharp. Its a nice one for everyday outdoor use, for sure.

I've got both of them and they are great lenses for the money.

You will probably want the extra reach of the 17-85 but as cheap as the 18-55 is it's hard not to get that one too.

i don't own 17-85 IS but heard from reviews that it's not that good,
aand i have 18-55 IS and tamron 17-50 f/2,8 what i can say is that the 18-55 IS is very good and IS is very helpfull the only upgradethat i'll do in this focal range is the canon 17-55 IS f/2.8.

so i gues u'll be better off with 18-55 IS and get the 17-55 IS f/2.8 when you get tired of it :P

My 17-85 IS is my walking around lens, unless I expect low light conditions (then it's the Sigma 30 f/1.4). I think the 17-85 IS is quite a bit better than it's reputation would lead one to expect, and it has served me well, except for the wide-angle end distortion, but since DPP (in later versions) made correction possible, I will not look at the 18-55 IS kit as a replacement (I was initially tempted). I like the longer reach, better build, and manual focus capability of the 17-85 IS.

However, if I got the 18-55 IS kit lens with a new camera (say an XSi), I sure wouldn't turn it down ... lot of lens for the money (or so it seems from the reviews).

Maxdave

The "not so good" idea depends on what you are comparing too.

The 17-85 IS is a lot better than many cheap lenses like the original 18-55 (non IS). It is worse than say the 17-50 2.8 that is twice the money though. It is a good in the middle lens that is great for most people, remember it is the kit lens that comes on the XXD cameras which again are sorta in the middle.

The 18-55 IS is a great new lens though, for the money the performance seems great from what I have seen online, and it is a great step up from the 18-55.

I would base your choice on two things, price and reach. Besides those two, the 18-55 IS and 17-85 IS should be pretty darn similar.

Photozone.de has reviews of both lenses.
IIRC, the 18-55 has sharper center and especially corners, less CA, and maybe even less distortion at the wide end. I think the IS is newer and works for pannig automatically as well.

The 17-85 of course has a better range, is wider, and has a better AF and build quality.

Get the 18-55IS and use the extra money towards a 55-250IS. This is a very nice starter set of lenses.

LeeSC wrote in post #5588021
Get the 18-55IS and use the extra money towards a 55-250IS. The is a very nice starter set of lenses.

Probably what I'd do.

YEP!

I've had the 18-55 IS for 5 months now. Amazing lens, especially for the price.

I've got the 18-55 IS, 28-105 USM II, Sigma 70-300 APO and Canon 60 f/2.8 macro.

I like sharp lenses. The 60 macro is sharper than the 18-55 IS, but then it's sharper than just about anything. The 18-55 beats the others (but they're still very good lenses).

Oh, yeah: the IS really works.

-js

Very mixed opinion on the 17-85 IS, but I am happy with mine.