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

Announced Feb 21, 2006 •
Zoom lens | Canon EF-S
mojorisn
 

I have owned this lens for quite a few years, and it is ALWAYS on the camera. It has traveled everywhere with me and never lets me down. Great color, contrast and sharp detail. I can't imagine going without it....it is the standard by which other lenses are judged (24-70 II on FF). https://www.flickr.com/photos/lesmn/sets/72157633107456636/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/lesmn/sets/72157633063746699/

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
sambam007
 

Id like to start off that its been a long winding road to get to this lens and Im so glad I got there in the end. I originally looked at getting the Canon 17-55mm lens but read up on its value to price ratio and horror stories on IS problems Dust, weight etc etc I originally bought the 15-85mm lens and loved its wide angle ability and sharpness however I am not a flash shooter and had alot of issues shooting indoor especially video.One day When shooting video on a cheapo tripod (never again) ...

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review

I owned this lens for six years, now sold. This was bought to be my go-to, walk around lens on a EOS 40D. On the plus side, low light performance was stellar. Not so great? I'm no pixel-peeper but images always came out just that little bit soft for my taste (as compared with my EF 70-200 f/4L, which always delivered far sharper and brighter images). Maybe I was the unlucky one to buy That Lens? Always left me wondering where all that money went, especially when I had to buy a hood ...

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review

If you are going to Purchase a Canon EF-S 17-55mm F/2.8 IS Lens for video, try to get a recent one (perhaps 2012/2013/2014) because the I.S. Image Stabilization appears to be much quieter than on earlier ones. I believe Canon has incorporated internal revisions to accomplish this. I have a 17-55mm (purchased 11-2013) and side by side with a friend's (he thinks 2010/2011) mine is much quieter. With the internal mic set to AUTO on a Canon 70D, my 17-55mm does not pick up the sound of the IS ...

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
Wolfheart1979
 

Sharp not so, I think it's more of a baseball bat than a lens, f/4 is not bad for a walk-around. Focus is alittle slow even compared to the 18-135 which renders images better in sharpness but not in contrast. So to sum it up. It's a high contrast tank that needs some more IQ Problems: Not so sharp, 3.5 has become a standard, IS isn't so effective.

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review

This was the first lens I bought after purchasing my first crop-sensor Canon DSLR, and I have no regrets.  It's big and somewhat heavy, but it gives you a great range of focal lengths and good to excellent all around quality and feel.  Photos are sharp and great color.  Not quite up to the build quality of an L lens, but worth the price.

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
sslankan
 

This is 1 of 3 lenses I own, (other 2 being primes) for my T4i. I have owned it for a few months now. (I bought it in the middle of June of 2013.) - and have taken well over.. 3000 shots with this lens - Used it out doors (even in light drizzle w/ no lens hood or filter) - have taken many group shots (paired with a 430exII) - and since getting the lens hood during my trip to New York.. have used that ever since (still no filter and probably never will) - only shoot in raw (use Lightroom 5) To ...

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
spirosk
 

Very good pectures sharp and clear Problems: I have it for 2 years i sent it twise to the servise with shuter problem (200 euros its time) allthow i use it gently as i do with all my equipment, is plastic nothing to do with L lenses but with allmost the same prise and the worst is that you cant use it at all with FF cameras .Was my worst choise I m totally regret it.It souldn't cost more than the half of its prise

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
treepop
 

Pros: This lens produces decent images and has a quick auto focus.Image stabilization is nice for video. Cons: Stupid expensive. Horrible build quality. Lens lets in dust like crazy. Image quality is worse than its 1/4 price competitors (Tamron 17-50). Recommendation: Don't listen to people who say it isn't a dust magnet. Don't listen to people who are "blown away by the quality of the images". They are just okay and the dust is a problem. Save your money and time you will take selling this ...

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
Wolfheart1979
 

Ok, here goes, I am an amateur photographer, my photos are professional but I will only call myself a pro when I get my webstie running, thing is, I have just broke my back´╗┐ to buy one due to all the glow on the net with it being the sharpest EFS availlable walk around, honestly I was dissapointed. Problems: 1. When a lens is praised for its constant f/2.8 and you get shots softer than a monkey's ass on 2.8 why the hell have it souped up with a 2.8 anyway where as the USP of this lens is the ...

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review