Canon 17-55 impressions (vs 17-40)

Started Jun 17, 2006 | Discussions thread
OP Tomm Regular Member • Posts: 285
Re: vignetting

No one's saying the 17-55 sucks or anything. On the contrary, I said that I'm on the fence about whether to get it or not, so I may soon be a 17-55 owner myself. I have a 17-40 that would be replaced w/ this if I were to buy it, so I was naturally comparing the two, and I thought others might find my thought processes and observations useful.

The reason people gnash their teeth about the price but end up buying it is not because it's priced well, but because there's no alternative for what it offers. It's like charging $5 for a small popcorn at a movie theatre--it's not priced right, but it's the only choice you have if you want popcorn. There's no marketing genius operating here; everyone knows you can overprice something under monopolistic conditions.

I don't see why it's apples to oranges for comparing 17-40 to 17-55. On the contrary, it's natural to compare the two, because they offer some intriguing tradeoffs at overlapping focal lengths: EF vs EFS, f4 vs f2.8, portability vs functionality,

Anyway, I just provided a more detailed price proposition in my reply elsewhere on this thread, where I made my case for the $800 price point being fair. But that's not happening any time soon, of course. So if I decide to get this lens, I'll end up paying that extra $300, then buy the hood separately to mitigate the flare issue, not because I think the price is right, but because I have no choice if I want +15mm and +4 stops handholding.

  • Tomm

Elan Remford wrote:
I too found some of the comparison standards to be well,
non-existent. Sure, at a wide aperture and wide angle, a lens is
going to exhibit light fall-off. The standard of comparison seems
to be the 17-40 at f/4, which doesn't take much of an imagination
to realize that the comparison is not apples to apples. I'd hate
to see what a prime evaluation wide-open would yield at f/1.4 in
this review.

The 17-55 is a home run, plain and simple. It's priced based on
what it delivers, which is a fast stabilized standard zoom, the one
one lens the entire EF lineup both lacks and needs most. Many of
those who are complaining about the pricing are the very same who
are marching right-out to buy one, and hating the fact that they
love it. Sounds like these are the marketing guys that I want
working for me, those that know how to price an item for its value.

I also found it interesting that it was compared (and unfavorably
so) to the 17-40, and L lens, with its metal barrel and other
design and build features inherent and specific to the "luxury"
line of lenses, something the 17-55 never claims to be. How does
the 17-55 compare to the buld of the 10-22, 17-85, 18-55, or 60
Macro? Now THAT one I might buy into.

Otherwise, everything that reaffirms this as being one terrific
lens is spot-on. I own a 30D so I can shoot with it even over my
16-35, 24-70, and 24-105 when I need stabilized wide aperture zppm
capability for available light event work and portraiture. At the
moment, there's no lens finer for the task, regardless of the color
of it's barrel stripe, initial, or if it includes a hood and case
or not.

GraphikEdition wrote:

1) Light falloff (vignetting) is a HUGE problem, not just in the
corners but even along the edges. It's definitely very noticeable
in the images, especially those with a bright blue sky. Honestly,
this is the worst I've ever seen of all of the lenses I've ever

I guess you mean at f2.8? This is normal for any fast lens and is
no where near as bad as a fast lens on a full frame camera. On full
frame cameras you get black corners from a lot of lenses, not just
fall off.

A sigma 30mm looks worse, more than a stop fall off, than the 17-55
and the 60mm macro at f2.8 has some fall off.

I guess your advice might be not to shoot landscapes at f2.8 and
then it wont be noticable.


Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow