Reading mode: Light Dark

The french website Chasseur d'images announces EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS

Go to last post
Apparently, the announced price in euro is quite expensive, 1300 euros. :/

But IS + f/2.8 probably worth it (if the build and IQ are near "L" standards).
 
who cares for an L:?

If image quality is good, you can put a red line on it yourself

This will be the best selling lens in the Canon line-up for quite some time

sugar
AirbusA380 said:
no text
Click to expand...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I can crop at the long end myself if I want to

Real men shoot wide angle

Less is more...
sadly, this rule does not apply to lenses...

some humble pictures : http://www.flickr.com/photos/67259727@N00/
 
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=17246336

sugar
Shaitan said:
The french website "Chasseur d'images" announces EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8
IS.

Source:

http://www2.photim.com/info/Sommaire.php

The announced pricepoint is of 1.300 €.

Still not "L" despite the pricepoint.

(sorry for the double post)
Click to expand...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I can crop at the long end myself if I want to

Real men shoot wide angle

Less is more...
sadly, this rule does not apply to lenses...

some humble pictures : http://www.flickr.com/photos/67259727@N00/
 
When I saw the price of 1300 EUR, I figured $1300 USD and thought, "What incredible price gouging!" But now I figure since Rob Galbraith shows the 30D for $1399 and Chausseur d'Images shows the 30D for 1549 EUR, I'd guess the U.S. price for the 17-55/2.8 IS will be more like 1399/1549*1300 = $1175 USD or more likely $1199 USD. So maybe I'd only call it "moderate price gouging."

Will surely be a sweet lens though. :) And its IS may play a pivotal role in winning people over to the somewhat underwhelming 30D launch who might otherwise go for the D200 and its excellent 17-55/2.8 lens.

Lincoln :)

--
ALL PhotoZone.de lens test data compared graphically:
http://www.pbase.com/lwestfall/lens_tests
 
L or no is of no consequence; I'm prepared to bet that Canon has a policy of using the 'L' designation only on lenses they want to sell to "professionals", which means no EF-S lens will ever carry it, no matter what its actual performance or build.

That said, €1300 is way past heart-attack territory. It doesn't matter if it has IS - it doesn't matter if it snuggles up to me in bed every morning with fresh brewed coffee - it's too much money. For that price I can get a 18-50 Sigma and hire a guy to steady the camera for me.

For half the price - even upwards of €800 - great, I'll consider it. But this is not worth it.

--
Japan: http://lucs.lu.se/people/jan.moren/log/current.html
Images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jannem/
 
If tamrons 17-50 is a good quality lens at

What canon is missing is a bright normal zoom priced between entry level (18-55) and below the expensive 17-40L and 17-85IS. And they release this (or do they?) above the price point of those expensive normal zooms...

It almost seems like canon thinnks that you are either on a really strict budget, or you are an "L-snob" with an unlimited budget. My guess is that most of us are somewhere in between, trying to make every dollar count, and we are looking for that semi-L-quality in the $250 to $600 per lens segment?
 
Like all other Canon lenses, this one is more expensive than a sigma r a Tamron alternative.

The lens has IS as well, I think it's price positioning is high, but comparable to the 70-200 sigma vs 70-200 IS form Canon

And the fact that it's an L or not should not impact your decision or impact the evaluation of the price

sugar
andersf said:
If tamrons 17-50 is a good quality lens at
18-50EX is $500 then I sure won't pay an extra grand for IS and the
canon brand...

What canon is missing is a bright normal zoom priced between entry
level (18-55) and below the expensive 17-40L and 17-85IS. And
they release this (or do they?) above the price point of those
expensive normal zooms...

It almost seems like canon thinnks that you are either on a really
strict budget, or you are an "L-snob" with an unlimited budget. My
guess is that most of us are somewhere in between, trying to make
every dollar count, and we are looking for that semi-L-quality in
the $250 to $600 per lens segment?
Click to expand...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I can crop at the long end myself if I want to

Real men shoot wide angle

Less is more...
sadly, this rule does not apply to lenses...

some humble pictures : http://www.flickr.com/photos/67259727@N00/
 
But he's absolutely right. If you want a cheap and cheerful wide to normal lens, Canon have you covered with the kit and some older, not great primes. If money is no object, there's already several good - but really, really expensive - primes and zooms. But in between there's this big, gaping void. This lens does nothing to alleviate it.

Of course, Sigma and Tamron are fortunately only too happy to fill that void.

--
Japan: http://lucs.lu.se/people/jan.moren/log/current.html
Images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jannem/
 
but hat won't change unles syou all start buying D200's
sugar
Jan Moren said:
But he's absolutely right. If you want a cheap and cheerful wide to
normal lens, Canon have you covered with the kit and some older,
not great primes. If money is no object, there's already several
good - but really, really expensive - primes and zooms. But in
between there's this big, gaping void. This lens does nothing to
alleviate it.

Of course, Sigma and Tamron are fortunately only too happy to fill
that void.

--
Japan: http://lucs.lu.se/people/jan.moren/log/current.html
Images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jannem/
Click to expand...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I can crop at the long end myself if I want to

Real men shoot wide angle

Less is more...
sadly, this rule does not apply to lenses...

some humble pictures : http://www.flickr.com/photos/67259727@N00/
 
In the same article the screwed up on the AF in the 30D - they said it wouuld have the same as the 5D, and it hasn't.
Not sure the 17-55 has IS
--
Regards,
DaveMart

Please see profile for equipment
 
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06022113canonefs1755f28g.asp

sugar
David Martin said:
In the same article the screwed up on the AF in the 30D - they said
it wouuld have the same as the 5D, and it hasn't.
Not sure the 17-55 has IS
--
Regards,
DaveMart

Please see profile for equipment
Click to expand...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I can crop at the long end myself if I want to

Real men shoot wide angle

Less is more...
sadly, this rule does not apply to lenses...

some humble pictures : http://www.flickr.com/photos/67259727@N00/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top