Just got 17-85mm IS lens

Hey folks.

My sister-in-law is upgrading all her lenses to L series, and I was able to buy her Canon 17-85mm IS lens from her. From what I have seen and played around with so far, it is a great lens. My only other lens is a Tamron 75-300. For the type of photography I do and want to do, these two lenses should do me for quite a while now.

Looking forward to getting out in the nice weather and start snapping away! And that is what I love about digital. Snap away till the cows come home and not incure the cost of developing film to see I like the pictures!

Would like to hear others views and opinions on either of these lenses. Like them, hate them, things to watch out for, how to best use them, etc.

Thanks...
Al

The 17-85 is a great lens to start with.
Pros -
-Great range of focal lengths, so you get an idea of the different types of photos you can take with focal lengths from 17 to 85mm.
-IS works great!
-VERY fast autofocus (with full-time manual focus)
-Very sharp in the longer end

Some cons -
-Distortion at 17mm can be pretty bad
-Some CA problems in harsh lighting conditions
-Slow at f/5.6

I generally only shoot with my 30/85 primes, but occasionally I'll mount my 17-85. The pictures it takes are fine within the range of pictures it can take (ie no blurred background shots, need flash indoors) But for someone starting out, I recommend it....

Great way to start out and learn what you want/need. My only other recommendation would be to pick up a cheap/fast prime; it will alllow you do things that your 17-85 can't do and having a fast prime will teach you alot about photography. The 50mm f/1.8 is a great prime to start with.

great lens. I had one for two years before i upgraded to L lenses. Awesome for outdoor shots. But tricky indoors without a flash

As soon as someone gives me $700, I'm selling my 17-85 to buy the 24-70L

I bought mine after debating between it and a much more expensive 17-40L. Decided to try the 17-85mm first, knowing it could always be sold later if I was unhappy. For what I expected of it, I'd say it's a great lens. Mine is actually very sharp on my 40D, produces nice color, has really quick autofocusing ability, and the IS is nice (though not as advanced at the 17-55's).

Grats on the new lenses. Good time of year to try out new glass

would you use this lens as a wide angle lens? As mentioned above, there seem to have distortion at 17. How much more of a difference by buying a shorter glass than 17? I'm trying to stay out of buying short lens. Because I'm saving my money for a 400 or a 500 but that's for another thread.

Am I missing a lot by not having a shorter glass?

I've had mine for about five months now and I love it. It's a decent lens for the money. It's something you can have mounted all day long. Build quality is quite good compared to some of the other kit lenses. I opted to go the with the 17 - 85 instead of the 18 - 55 kit lens, pretty sure I made the right move.

I've done comparisons @ 17-20mm with my 17-85 and my Sigma 10-20, and the Sigma 10-20 is WAY better than the Canon. Sharper, less distortion...This was just inside with controlled lighting, so I can't compare how it would handle flare/CA.

Like I wrote above, the 17-85 is good for someone starting out as they get a nice range of focal lengths and can get a feel for the different types of photos one can take at various focal lengths. The IS and the excellent autofocus are nice bonuses. Optically it's an ok lens....

Not sure what lenses you have now, but I HIGHLY recommend the Sigma 10-20 (or any of the other ultra-wide-angles, they're all excellent). The Canon 17-85, My recommendation is "(just barely) recommended" (apologies to DPR )

Canajun wrote in post #7873422
would you use this lens as a wide angle lens? As mentioned above, there seem to have distortion at 17. How much more of a difference by buying a shorter glass than 17? I'm trying to stay out of buying short lens. Because I'm saving my money for a 400 or a 500 but that's for another thread.

Am I missing a lot by not having a shorter glass?

got mine over a year ago, taken some nice pics with it and like the is no flash option - my walkaround lens

about 3 mo ago got 17-55 f2.8 and this is now the go to lens for normal walkaround
still debating on selling it as with the 40d and xti i have a backup when i carry both bodies [not often]

it [17-85] is a good lens while the 17-55 is a great one at 2x-3x the price of the 17-85

ymmv

Got it in the kit with my 40D last februaryïts a decent performer and teh IS is very nifty
as stated sitortion is present at 17mm but personally that never bothered me that much, it isnt the sharpest lens out there though (at least my copy)
I find myself using it less and less.
Mostly i shoot at wider angles (siggy 12-24) or longer end (70-200), when i feel the need for soemthing in between my 50mm performs perfectly and thanks to this i havent used the 17-85 in months so i gave it to my little brother

Sitting in my car in the supermarket car park, idling away the time whilst my wife was hunting and gathering inside, I had put the 17-85mm onto my 400D and took a few shot of the inside of my motor, this was essentially a test to see if the 17-85 was as good as I remembered it to be, (not used it in many months since I got the 5D which it won't fit on) (onto which it will not fit)

It is just as good as I thought it was, check out these links, no pp except size change to 1000 x 667 pxls for the Zenfolio site.

One of these shots is wide open at 17mm, I see no distortion at all and the IQ impresses me, even at 100% the detail is impressive, a great little lens which I bought to replace the old 18-55 kit lens which also has a bad press.
http://ukuleleman.zenf​olio.com/img/v1/p56109​2428.jpg
http://ukuleleman.zenf​olio.com/img/v0/p73465​9119.jpg
http://ukuleleman.zenf​olio.com/img/v7/p83318​7470.jpg

Thanks everyone for you thoughts and suggestions.

I have only one other lens, as shown in my signature. I've played around taking some pictures and like the lens so far. For my purposes, I think these two lenses will suit my needs fairly well. I might want to get one more faster lens for doing some low-light shots, possibly a 50mm 1.8.

Al

Congrats on your new lens. There's alot of range in that zoom, it makes for a good walk around lens.