EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM second impressions (Mark II)

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
RLight Senior Member • Posts: 1,592
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM second impressions (Mark II)
1

I have a 2nd copy of a refurbished EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM adapted, this time on my EOS M6 Mark II. The 1st time I tried this lens I quickly returned it on the Mark I. Poor handling, battery life and AF not keeping up with the nature of this lens made it a bad combination with my Mark I.

However comma, on the Mark II, it is another story as I suspected, and hence my re-trying it, especially on it's existing sale (got it for close to $400 flat with my discount from Canon direct). I don't love having two systems (EOS M and EOS R) even though I love the results of the latter, it's expensive, heavy, and duplicative. Giving this a go to see what kind of tradeoffs I get and if it's an acceptable "party lens" solution.

.

Impressions thus far (had it for under an hour now, but I'm eating dinner, why not?):

Balances better with the improved grip on the mark II. It's not an instant return like it was on the Mark I. It did not handle well at all on the Mark I, the grip couldn't comfortably support the weight. The grip on the Mark II supports heavier lenses like the 70-300 IS II and now the 17-55 f/2.8 much better.

.

However, thus far, BBF is awkward due to the weight. I've been using C2, which I have no BBF, and seeing how it goes.

Battery life isn't abysmal thus far. Good.

This copy of the lens doesn't have the "hump" when zooming where there is a lump at the end I have to exert a little bit of extra oomph to zoom it wide. This copy is smooth. Appears new in fact.

Focusing is fast, like it was the last time probably due to the USM motor.

However, eye-AF isn't as accurate as EF-M 32mm or 22mm. I've been shooting indoors afterdark in ISO1600+ @ f/2.8... Clearly having more light or a native STM motor helps.

Fv, Auto and P all select too hot of shutters than necessary when zoomed at 55mm... 1/125, although great on my EOS R as you want crispy shots of people, 1/80 is better because the EOS M6 Mark II is a very different beast: 14FPS affords a higher chance of keepers at lower shutters of people and ISO handling is more a concern on crop. Keep an eye on your shutter on this lens in low light. You may push too hot of an ISO than needed as the IS does a good job.

The lens isn't quite as crispy from image review of in camera JPEGs (as native EF-M lenses or my EOS R); I loaded the DLO for the lens into the camera and it appears a bit better. Fine tuning images even with in-camera RAW helps quite a bit. Image quality is better on the M6 Mark II than the M6 Mark I. More resolution is more resolution and the EF-S 17-55 is no slouch, even though it's not a 32mm...

Anyhow more on IQ much later as I need to shoot some things worth shooting, not just random stuff in the house to get a feel for it. That comes this weekend.

Having zoom is beneficial at f/2.8. And the price is definitely right. Too early to say it's a winner, but it's not going back instantly like it did the first time which is a good sign. Trust me, when the Sigma showed up on my door, it was gone next day, as was this lens the first time. This time, it's made it past the initial screening. It's worthy of seeing if it can supplant my R.

PS, 4K video with it, is definitely a winner. I can now shoot without using EIS (22 and 32mm indoors), and without blowing out my ISO with lenses that have OIS (18-150) indoors. The video footage is defiantly good.

 RLight's gear list:RLight's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS M6 II Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Samyang 21mm F1.4 +3 more
Canon EOS M6
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MAC
MAC
MAC
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow