Canon 17-55 impressions (vs 17-40)

Started Jun 17, 2006 | Discussions thread
Elan Remford Veteran Member • Posts: 3,716
Re: Flare issue easily corrected?

Except for the fact that the wider aperture ends up letting in a relatively greater amount of light from a broader set of angles, not to mention the difference between 17 and 24 in this regard.

Don_D wrote:

ed rader wrote:

i'd say the IQ is the 17-55's strong point and build is one of the
weaker points. probably the thin i like the least about the 17-55,
tho, is the flare issue which sounds like it could have been easily
corrected.

I'm not so sure that the flare issue could have been "easily
corrected".
From Canon's press release of the 17-55 lens:

"Harmful reflections eliminated
By optimising Super Spectra lens coatings and lens element shaping,
Canon’s engineers have been effective in suppressing flare and
ghosting – more prone to occur with digital cameras due to
reflection off the image sensor. By increasing light absorption,
coatings reduce reflections off lens element surfaces to deliver
crisp, undistorted images with natural colour balance".

I looked up the 24-105 EF L press release and it says exactly the
same. So Canon is using the "Super Spectra lens coatings" on both
the EF-S 17-55 and the 24-105 EF L lenses.
Isn't it more likely that the large number of lens groups in the
17-55 just made the problem more acute and more difficult to fix?

-Don

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