Canon 17-55 impressions (vs 17-40)

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

No hood--they didn't have it for rent, and I'm not committed to buying yet. I'm assuming that the hood would help w/ some of the incidental sun flare issues, but it probably wouldn't do much for shooting at night with street lamps. In contrast, I can have street lamps in my photos w/ the 17-40, and they just have pleasant glows around them.

  • Tomm

brianric wrote:
Are you using a hood on the 17-55/2.8 IS?

Tomm wrote:

I just posted some of the test photos I took here:

http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/1572246

They're resized and slightly sharpened, which shouldn't be an issue
for these samples. The first few show the various flare problems I
saw. Then I have a series what show the upper corner and edge
light falloff at various apertures, plus equivalent 17-40 shots for
comparison. I also included shots that show the closest focus
(macro magnification) and bokeh. The captions contain more detail
on the exposure and what to look for. I'm not claiming these are
super-scientific, but perhaps these will help illustrate why I'm
concerned about the flare and falloff. To be fair, when the 17-55
is hitting on all cylinders, it's a pretty incredible lens, so I
included photo #4 to show why I may still end up buying it.

Enjoy!

  • Tomm

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