Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS vs. 18-55 IS

I am upgrading from 30D to 50D and would like to upgrade my primary lens also. So, how does the 17-85 IS compare to my 18-55 IS lens in terms of focus speed and image quality? Is it worth the upgrade or is there another lens I should consider in this price range? Adorama has it refubished for 350.00.
Clay

I suggest keep the 18-55 IS and consider purchasing the Speedlite 430 EX II external flash [$250]

Then consider the Tamron 17-50 non-vc [$450]

IMO the 17-85 is no substantial upgrade to the kit lens you have which is really pretty good when complimented with an external flash used properly.

Regards whatever your decision!

Thanks for the input. I already have an external flash but was just considering upgrading glass since I will have the 30D to sell or trade.

You should consider the Tamron 17-50 2.8 or Tamron 24-75 2.8 to replace your kit lens. You can pick up either in the classifieds here for your price
range. It is an excellent upgrade and the 2.8 comes in very handy. Some folks complain about the noise of the AF, but it does not bother me.

Let me note that do have the 18-55IS, but have never had the 17-85, so I can't comment on that.

Thanks Duane. I like the fact that the 17-50 is 2.8 throughout the zoom range. Does it have full time manual focus? I think that would be handy with live view.

Despite the 17-85mm not being very popular on this forum, I have to admit I don't find it's shortcomings that bad. True, it's not the sharpest lens Canon makes but it's by no means the softest. The biggest problem with the 17-85 is the wide end, 17mm probably has the highest distortion of all Canon zooms, edge softness and high CA. By 24mm almost all of these are corrected and stay constant throughout the rest of the FL range.

Some of these shortcomings can be easily fixed in post, PTLens or DxO can fix the distortion and vignetting. But you can't fix the softness.

The positives of the 17-85mm are an excellent range for a walkaround lens (I personally tend to use the long end much more then the wide anyway), the really fast and accurate USM AF, and the very efficient and convenient IS system. These positives easily outweigh the negatives for me personally, and I can't justify upgrading to a 15-85mm or 17-55mm for the marginal IQ improvement that only I will notice anyway (my friends and family really won't see it unless I point it out to them, just like my 70-200 shots).

I will say though that I got the 17-85mm as the kit lens with my 40D. I was debating getting the 40D body only and picking a Tamron 17-50mm instead, but the kit lens came out to half price of the Tamron if I had gone for body only + Tamron route, and I have to say I don't regret my choice at all.

Whether the 17-85mm is a big enough upgrade for you (longer range, slightly better build, much faster auto focus and possibly better IS?) to justify the price is a question for you. The 17-85mm is pretty cheap on the second hand market so shouldn't be overlooked too quickly.

I just checked the 17-50 Tamron at Adorama. 6 year waranty sounds pretty impressive. I really don't want to upgrade if I can't get image quality increase that lives up to the 15mp sensor. How about my full time manual focus question? The 17-85 Canon does have that.

Yes, the 17-85 has full time manual.

If you want the best quality possible you have to go with the Canon 17-55 or Tamron 17-50. They are both amazing, but also more expensive (the 17-55 especially). f/2.8 is great to have no doubt, and if you want better low light performance those two will be a big improvement from your 18-55, but for me personally f/2.8 isn't fast enough to use indoors to stop movement. Even f/1.8 on my nifty fifty is not always enough, and that's with ISO 1600 or even 3200. That's why a better prime like a 30mm f/1.4 is the only option if you want low light performance without a flash. My 17-85 with bounced flash is amazingly sharp and I don't feel any need for a faster lens if I use my flash.

mayt444 wrote in post #9366372
Thanks Duane. I like the fact that the 17-50 is 2.8 throughout the zoom range. Does it have full time manual focus? I think that would be handy with live view.

No it does not, not sure if the new version does or not.

Voss27 wrote in post #9366488
Yes, the 17-85 has full time manual.

If you want the best quality possible you have to go with the Canon 17-55 or Tamron 17-50. They are both amazing, but also more expensive (the 17-55 especially). f/2.8 is great to have no doubt, and if you want better low light performance those two will be a big improvement from your 18-55, but for me personally f/2.8 isn't fast enough to use indoors to stop movement. Even f/1.8 on my nifty fifty is not always enough, and that's with ISO 1600 or even 3200. That's why a better prime like a 30mm f/1.4 is the only option if you want low light performance without a flash. My 17-85 with bounced flash is amazingly sharp and I don't feel any need for a faster lens if I use my flash.

+1 in regards to the external flash since it negates the need for IS, VC, or OS shooting static subjects indoors. Alot of folks just dont like using flash but it sure compliments even my fast lenses indoors allowing me to use the sweetspot on any of the glass in my bag.

Regards,

Silverfox1 wrote in post #9366540
+1 in regards to the external flash since it negates the need for IS, VC, or OS shooting static subjects indoors. Alot of folks just dont like using flash but it sure compliments even my fast lenses indoors allowing me to use the sweetspot on any of the glass in my bag.

Regards,

I agree, but he said he has a flash.

Thanks again for all your input everyone. Any votes for rat-holeing my money till summer and getting a 17-40L? Maybe a used one.

mayt444 wrote in post #9366612
Thanks again for all your input everyone. Any votes for rat-holeing my money till summer and getting a 17-40L? Maybe a used one.

I personally don't see any compelling reason to use the 17-40 L on a crop body. If you want the L build and prestige then you should look at the 24-105 IS L, a much more useful range. The 17-40/50 range is much better covered by either the Canon 17-55 or Tamron 17-50.

It all comes down to what you use your camera for the most, and what lens type and range will be most useful to you.