Reading mode: Light Dark

17-55/2.8 what does yours do?

Go to last post
I

InTheWoods

Member
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Location
AU
I just got a new 17-55 and have noticed something odd - I wanted to check if other people with this lens have the same oddness or not. By the way, the build quality of this lens is pretty good, ok its not a 17-40L but its nowhere near as bad as I was expecting :)

The odd thing: At the 17mm focal length, if I focus on something 15+ meters away, the focus distance in the lens window is barely 3m, usually a bit less. The exif subject distance data confirms around the same value (varies around 2.4-2.9m). What does yours say? And how old is your lens (as there are hidden differences between older and newer manufactured lenses).

I might replace the lens if its not normal, as I sometimes use the lens distance window when shooting landscapes at night when I can't autofocus, and also ETTL-II uses lens distance information in its flash calculations. If it is normal for all copies of this lens model then its ok. And I don't like having one that isn't normal, having paid about $1000 for it! :)

The distance information gradually gets more correct as I zoom to 55mm on the same target - by 55mm its about right (reading infinity on a distant target). I have a 17-40L and 100/2.8L macro which when tripod mounted on the same body at the same target go straight to infinity on the distance window and won't budge. The 17-55 will re-focus about 1 in 2 or 3 times I back button focus on the target.

My tests were shot tripod mounted on the same subject at the same distance, using one-shot AF. I get the same result no matter if I use normal phase detection AF, live view contrast detection AF, or live view 10x zoom MF.
 
I've had the 17-55 for at least 4 years and have used it on a 30D, 40D and now a 7D and the lens stays on the camera 85% of the time. I'd suggest trying the same shots with another lens you have and if you don't get any errors, sendi the lens back. This is an excellent lens for a Conon APS sensor and it should work well for you.

Kent
 
I've had a used, mint 17-55 F2.8 IS (serial 60001xx0) for a few weeks, and I've just checked it on my 50D where it needs around +7 to +8 AF MA adjustment.

Viewing items at effective infinity, such as illuminated street lights, it registers on the infinity bar for both 17 & 55mm settings. At around 3m in good internal lighting, the scale is accurate at the 55mm setting, and very close at the 17mm setting, where there's slight variation from trial to trial. At closer settings it also seems OK, bearing in mind that the scale is measured from the sensor plane.

If mine had been used on a body without AF MA, that could explain why I was able to buy it s/h - it needs the AF MA adjustment to get the best out of it at f2.8, where it's very sharp, and produces a very clean image. However, mine seems quite reluctant to give me anything like a sensible focused distance reading. Most often, there's no figure given; or it's around 653m for moderate distance images. The same happens for my EF 300 f2.8L IS so it's probably a fault on my 50D.

My checks were carried out hand-held with the IS turned off.
InTheWoods said:
I just got a new 17-55 and have noticed something odd
Click to expand...
InTheWoods said:
The odd thing: At the 17mm focal length, if I focus on something 15+ meters away, the focus distance in the lens window is barely 3m, usually a bit less. The exif subject distance data confirms around the same value (varies around 2.4-2.9m). What does yours say? And how old is your lens (as there are hidden differences between older and newer manufactured lenses).

The distance information gradually gets more correct as I zoom to 55mm on the same target - by 55mm its about right (reading infinity on a distant target). I have a 17-40L and 100/2.8L macro which when tripod mounted on the same body at the same target go straight to infinity on the distance window and won't budge. The 17-55 will re-focus about 1 in 2 or 3 times I back button focus on the target.
Click to expand...
--
Malcolm Stewart
Milton Keynes, UK
 
Thanks for that, mine definitely isn't like yours then.

Any other takers who can test theirs? If somebody else can confirm, I think I'll return the lens.

As far as front focus/back focus goes, I think its ok. I have a 60D so I can't calibrate that anyway.
 
Perhaps, off topic, but may I ask what caused you to buy both the 17-55 and the 17-40L? That's a lot of money to invest in duplicate focal ranges.
--

I've never thought of photography as 'finding beauty in the things that go unnoticed,' although that's a worthy philosophy too. My goal has been to find those moments where people would say, 'oh, you shouldn't bother trying to get that on film, it's a moment that just has to be experienced.' Those moments are the ones I strive to capture most.
 
The Ninjalectual said:
Perhaps, off topic, but may I ask what caused you to buy both the 17-55 and the 17-40L? That's a lot of money to invest in duplicate focal ranges.
Click to expand...
I had the 17-40 and am in the process of switching to the 17-55 for the extra stop, the IS, extra reach, and a bit of extra sharpness. The extra reach was important - FF equiv of 88mm vs 64mm makes it a more useful standard zoom, esp when combined with f2.8 and IS.
 
If anyone else could check theirs for me that would be great, thanks - so I'm armed when I go to the shop...
 
The Ninjalectual said:
Perhaps, off topic, but may I ask what caused you to buy both the 17-55 and the 17-40L? That's a lot of money to invest in duplicate focal ranges.
Click to expand...
I don't have the 17-40L, but I had upgraded my EF 70-200 F4L to the IS version last March via a straight purchase, and still had the non-IS lens around my home waiting for a suitable opportunity for part exchanging against my next major item of photo gear.

Since getting the EF-s 17-55 F2.8 IS, I have noticed the very different "feel" of its IS as compared to the kit lens, an EF-s 18-55 F3.5-5.6 IS.

See: http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/951910/an/0/page/0#951910 for more details.

As mentioned above, I am very impressed with the performance of the 17-55 at full aperture.

Malcolm Stewart
Milton Keynes, UK
 
My 17-55 gives sharp results at all focal lenghts at f/2.8, so the focus is definitely right on. Also, no difference between liveview contrast-detect focus and phase-detect focus. The distance scale does show somewhat shorter distance at the wide end than at the long end. Most lenses, including the 17-55, are not parfocal, meaning that focus shifts when you zoom. As a result the distance scale is not accurate.
I've had my 17-55IS for over 3 years. It's a solid performer.

The easiest way to check whether focus is good is to compare contrast-detect (always accurate) and phase-detect focus (depends on AF correctness). The distance scale should give the same reading with both methods and the pictures should be equally sharp.
InTheWoods said:
I just got a new 17-55 and have noticed something odd - I wanted to check if other people with this lens have the same oddness or not. By the way, the build quality of this lens is pretty good, ok its not a 17-40L but its nowhere near as bad as I was expecting :)

The odd thing: At the 17mm focal length, if I focus on something 15+ meters away, the focus distance in the lens window is barely 3m, usually a bit less. The exif subject distance data confirms around the same value (varies around 2.4-2.9m). What does yours say? And how old is your lens (as there are hidden differences between older and newer manufactured lenses).

I might replace the lens if its not normal, as I sometimes use the lens distance window when shooting landscapes at night when I can't autofocus, and also ETTL-II uses lens distance information in its flash calculations. If it is normal for all copies of this lens model then its ok. And I don't like having one that isn't normal, having paid about $1000 for it! :)

The distance information gradually gets more correct as I zoom to 55mm on the same target - by 55mm its about right (reading infinity on a distant target). I have a 17-40L and 100/2.8L macro which when tripod mounted on the same body at the same target go straight to infinity on the distance window and won't budge. The 17-55 will re-focus about 1 in 2 or 3 times I back button focus on the target.

My tests were shot tripod mounted on the same subject at the same distance, using one-shot AF. I get the same result no matter if I use normal phase detection AF, live view contrast detection AF, or live view 10x zoom MF.
Click to expand...
--
Slowly learning to use the 450D, the Canon G6 and the Fuji F200.
Public pictures at http://debra.zenfolio.com/ .
 
Thanks Paul. So at 17mm what does your distance window say when you've just focussed on something a long way away? A bit under infinity? Or a bit under 3 meters?

I get the same result when using either PDAF or CDAF, so the focus is correct, just the distance scale is wrong. But going on what you said that could be normal. Can anybody else confirm what theirs does?
 
Hi,
InTheWoods said:
...

The odd thing: At the 17mm focal length, if I focus on something 15+ meters away, the focus distance in the lens window is barely 3m, usually a bit less. The exif subject distance data confirms around the same value (varies around 2.4-2.9m). What does yours say? And how old is your lens (as there are hidden differences between older and newer manufactured lenses).
Click to expand...
I must say I was a bit surprised with your finding, so I've checked some of my photos (taken with 450D). And indeed: at bigger (actual) focus distances, "distance" value inside Exif is max up to 4m -even in cases, where one would expect near infinity. That is, my lens behaves like your.

Now, my thoughts:
  • From what I can judge, my lens is sharp in such cases.
  • At 17mm DoF is getting huge. If lens is set to f/5.6 and lens focus distance to 3m, everything from 1.5m to infinity will have acceptable sharpness (=in focus). That is, setting lens focus distance to i.e. 50m isn't really needed.
  • We must know, that "distance" value written into Exif, is actually ment for calculating exposure when flash is used... and not many (if any) flashes are capable to lit subject 50m away and covering angle of 78° (which is at 17mm).
  • Explanation of Paul De Bra (in this thread) seems reasonable.
So, everything is fine.. but how about this scenario:

Subject distance is about 100m (landscape), focal length 17mm and aperture f/2.8? What focus distance will camera pick? I hope, it will set lens to at least about 5.5m (this would guarantee in-focus from about 3m to infinity). I've gone thru my photos (taken with this lens) and found none such example -so I can only quess.

Saying all above, I wouldn't worry much about this. Yes, $1000 is a lot money (at least for me), but I'm happy with this lens... stopped searching for "better" lens since then (over two years ago).

Bogdan
 
Ok thanks.

I have to admit, with IS off, and tripod mounted, this lens is impressive in the centre even at f2.8. At 17mm the edges are not so great, but still a little bit better than the 17-40L - centre sharpness is about the same. I didn't scientifically compare the long end, but the 17-55 seems better all over the frame at that end. So I think it is a great lens.

Out of curiosity did a front/back focus test on my 60D and its fine. Haven't found any lenses yet which need the 7D's MFA, but I don't have any non-canons to try.
 
Have the same behavior with 24-70L, at 70mm it registers in EXIF as infinity, but as moving to short end it progressively gets shrunk to something like 4-5 meters.

Pretty much the same pattern using phase and contrast detection AF. The target on the captured image looks in focus.
Paul De Bra said:
My 17-55 gives sharp results at all focal lenghts at f/2.8, so the focus is definitely right on. Also, no difference between liveview contrast-detect focus and phase-detect focus. The distance scale does show somewhat shorter distance at the wide end than at the long end. Most lenses, including the 17-55, are not parfocal, meaning that focus shifts when you zoom. As a result the distance scale is not accurate.
I've had my 17-55IS for over 3 years. It's a solid performer.

The easiest way to check whether focus is good is to compare contrast-detect (always accurate) and phase-detect focus (depends on AF correctness). The distance scale should give the same reading with both methods and the pictures should be equally sharp.
InTheWoods said:
I just got a new 17-55 and have noticed something odd - I wanted to check if other people with this lens have the same oddness or not. By the way, the build quality of this lens is pretty good, ok its not a 17-40L but its nowhere near as bad as I was expecting :)

The odd thing: At the 17mm focal length, if I focus on something 15+ meters away, the focus distance in the lens window is barely 3m, usually a bit less. The exif subject distance data confirms around the same value (varies around 2.4-2.9m). What does yours say? And how old is your lens (as there are hidden differences between older and newer manufactured lenses).

I might replace the lens if its not normal, as I sometimes use the lens distance window when shooting landscapes at night when I can't autofocus, and also ETTL-II uses lens distance information in its flash calculations. If it is normal for all copies of this lens model then its ok. And I don't like having one that isn't normal, having paid about $1000 for it! :)

The distance information gradually gets more correct as I zoom to 55mm on the same target - by 55mm its about right (reading infinity on a distant target). I have a 17-40L and 100/2.8L macro which when tripod mounted on the same body at the same target go straight to infinity on the distance window and won't budge. The 17-55 will re-focus about 1 in 2 or 3 times I back button focus on the target.

My tests were shot tripod mounted on the same subject at the same distance, using one-shot AF. I get the same result no matter if I use normal phase detection AF, live view contrast detection AF, or live view 10x zoom MF.
Click to expand...
--
Slowly learning to use the 450D, the Canon G6 and the Fuji F200.
Public pictures at http://debra.zenfolio.com/ .
Click to expand...
 
Any update on this from OP or anyone else with the same experience, does Canon fix that or it should be considered "normal" on modern zoom lenses.
Andrew_WOT said:
Have the same behavior with 24-70L, at 70mm it registers in EXIF as infinity, but as moving to short end it progressively gets shrunk to something like 4-5 meters.

Pretty much the same pattern using phase and contrast detection AF. The target on the captured image looks in focus.
Click to expand...
 
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