16-35 f2.8 L vs 17-55 IS

Started Mar 30, 2011 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
eco_bach Forum Member • Posts: 53
16-35 f2.8 L vs 17-55 IS

Hi
i shoot mostly video am am perplexed by which lens to invest in next.
I have a Tamron 28-70

A Tamron 17-50 NON VC which I am considering selling because I want image stabilisation.

And also a 50 year old Pentax Super takumar 50mm1.4

Lenses I am considering

1--Canon 17-55 IS to replace my tamron 17-50

2-Canon 16-35L

3_Canon 35 1.4L OR Sigma 30 1.4

Please, help me spend my money!
Which ONE of the above would you get?

Lemming51
Lemming51 Forum Pro • Posts: 14,079
only 1 of your choices has IS

eco_bach wrote:

Hi
i shoot mostly video am am perplexed by which lens to invest in next.

I have a Tamron 28-70, a Tamron 17-50 NON VC which I am considering selling because I want image stabilisation. And also a 50 year old Pentax Super takumar 50mm1.4
Lenses I am considering:
1--Canon 17-55 IS to replace my tamron 17-50

That's the lens. Get it. Unless you want to spend less, in which case you should consider Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM, or Tamron SP 17-50 f/2.8 XR Di II VC

2--Canon 16-35L

No. No IS, too short a zoom range, too expensive compared to better alternatives.

3--Canon 35 1.4L OR Sigma 30 1.4

No IS, or no IS.

-- hide signature --

Unapologetic Canon Apologist

 Lemming51's gear list:Lemming51's gear list
Canon EOS 40D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM +5 more
irm Senior Member • Posts: 2,654
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS

I suspect IS will not be much use to you while shooting video on a Canon DSLR because the IS does not run continuously. Also you will hear the IS as a whine or buzz in the sound.

I have 2 of the lenses you are interested in, the 16-35 and the 17-55. I haven't tried viedeo with the 16-35, but have to agree with the previous poster the zoom range is too small. I am not sure that the zoom range on the 17-55 is that great either, the 18-200 or 55-250 would probably better for video work on a DSLR.

I bought my wife the Lumix G10 with only the 14-42mm lens, way too short for video, not enough zoom, so when she comes home from her overseas trip the 45-200 is waiting.
--
my 2 exposed flashcubes worth.

Ian the pbase supporter.
http://pbase.com/ianm_au

Please check my profile for equipment list.
An amateur with dreams of being a good to excellent photographer.

 irm's gear list:irm's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Panasonic Lumix DMC-G10 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II +12 more
James Madara Forum Member • Posts: 99
Re: 16-35 f2.8 L vs 17-55 IS

I have the Canon 17-55 IS and love it, however I agree with the other poster IS isn't meant for video. The best IS for video is a tripod. This lens in fantastic for photos.

I would think your 50mm would be great for video. You can always use look at getting a 35mm or 85mm if needed.

Tejas Ramakrishnan Forum Member • Posts: 73
Re: 16-35 f2.8 L vs 17-55 IS

You seem to be ready to make an investment in any of the said lenses. I think you should consider the 17-85mm also...

See.

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens as shown below costs near to $1000 or more if you are looking to get a new one...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000EW8074/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=dp-rev-forum-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B000EW8074

The Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens comes for about $500

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0002Y5WXO/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=dp-rev-forum-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B0002Y5WXO

Or the Canon EF 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM UD Wide Angle lens for around $800 (some rebate now at amazon i think. It was listed for $1200 or so a while back)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002NEGTTM/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=dp-rev-forum-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B002NEGTTM

Hope you find a good option among the three. In case you are looking for low light shots more then, you could stick with the EF-S 17-55 which has a larger aperture and is the faster of the set, but the added zoom of the 17-85 and or the wide angle feature of the 15-85 might interest you. Check them out too. Good luck and all the best.

Jday83 New Member • Posts: 5
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS

Totally agree with not choosing IS for your video shooting. To take it even further, the IQ between the Tamron 28-75 and 70-200 2.8 is incredibly close to the canon equivalents, given their cost. The only reason I went with Canon L for all my glass is the AF isn't as accurate or fast enough with Tamron, from my experience. The IS was also a major demand of my still shooting. I tested all these lenses side by side and researched them obsessively before not choosing Tamron. But if I were in your shoes, I'd stick with T.

Pultzar Senior Member • Posts: 1,504
No, you really want IS for video

The 15-85 runs the IS continuously during video and it is dead silent. It is remarkable and makes hand holding the camera very very usable.

I have also used the 17-55 and it worked brilliantly as well with IS. The only lens so far that I have had a noise problem with is the 70-200 f/4

If you are hand holding and want shaky video, forgo IS. Otherwise make sure that you have IS or another stabilization system.

Pultzar Senior Member • Posts: 1,504
Re: 16-35 f2.8 L vs 17-55 IS

The 15-85 works great with IS during video. It isn't so great for zooming while taking video, but none of the mentioned lenses are.

Faintandfuzzy Veteran Member • Posts: 3,328
Only one option

The 17-55 is the only lens you list with IS. And it is a superb lens! Get it!

 Faintandfuzzy's gear list:Faintandfuzzy's gear list
Canon PowerShot G3 Nikon Coolpix 950 Olympus E-10 Canon PowerShot SX150 IS Canon EOS D30 +10 more
papabear2 Senior Member • Posts: 1,139
Re: Only one option

The IS is necessary for video, the only drawback is that your arms may get tired. AND there is no noise with my 18-135.

You can develop a style of zooming and refocusing while shooting if you choose a time where you can sneak in a cross dissolve transition 1 or 3 sec. in post. But certain situations may demand manual refocus

the micro shake is removed in IS

The Pentax takumar 50 1.4 for the 60 D is the the current rage at some of the video forums because of it's unique color treatment.

skanter
skanter Forum Pro • Posts: 10,886
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS

irm wrote:

I suspect IS will not be much use to you while shooting video on a Canon DSLR because the IS does not run continuously. Also you will hear the IS as a whine or buzz in the sound.

You suspect wrong. IS is essential for hand-held video, it runs continuously, and makes no noise.

Please check your facts before answering questions.
--
Sam K., NYC

 skanter's gear list:skanter's gear list
Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5 Canon EOS 70D Sony a6000 Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM +10 more
dave_bass5
dave_bass5 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,235
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS

I definitely get IS noise from my 17-55 in my 60D videos if im recording in a quiet environment.

This is a fact and ill upload videos to prove it if needed. There have been loads of posts about IS noise and video.

I do agree IS is very essential.

 dave_bass5's gear list:dave_bass5's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony a6000 Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L USM Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM +10 more
akiskev Junior Member • Posts: 44
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS

So true!

skanter wrote:

irm wrote:

I suspect IS will not be much use to you while shooting video on a Canon DSLR because the IS does not run continuously. Also you will hear the IS as a whine or buzz in the sound.

You suspect wrong. IS is essential for hand-held video, it runs continuously, and makes no noise.

Please check your facts before answering questions.
--
Sam K., NYC

turokker New Member • Posts: 13
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS

dave_bass5 wrote:

I definitely get IS noise from my 17-55 in my 60D videos if im recording in a quiet environment.

"me too." I used to own a 15-85 which I don't recall getting any noise with. maybe improvements made in the 3-stop -> 4-stop IS iteration...

katman68 Regular Member • Posts: 487
Not true

"IS doesn't run continuous"?! That is false.

My 70-200/f4(only IS lens i have) did so zoomed in tight the entire time shooting video of silky sifakas in Madagascar back in Nov. Thankfully! Can't recall if i set it up that way w/Custom Functions by pressing a specific button, but don't think so.

My 28-70/2.8 i mostly shot the video with on that trip did NOT have IS, and it shows. As a result, i now consider IS an invaluable feature for DSLR video due to the inherent stability issues. Yes when using the built-in mike it may pick up the IS noise(at least noisier models like my 70-200), but generally just quiet shooting. On occasion i simply turned it off at the lens(if i was able to prop against a tree etc). But an external mike or recorder should be used anyways & will minimize this. Compared to video without IS, video WITH is well worth any drawback. That is unless you by a stability mount, which can easily run well over $1000.

Which lens is best for you is a personal decision. It depends on what focal length you prefer for one. I prefer to avoid EF-S lenses because of future full-frame body compatiblilty issues, but the 17-55/2.8 IS is a great choice. Particularly for video with the IS. When the $ is there, that is the lens i plan to get to replace my 28-70 when shooting video. You hear great things about its optical Q too. Had i known HOW bad DSLR video stability was prior to my trip, i seriously would've looked into renting the 17-55.

The 24-105/f4 IS is another versatile choice, thought unsure if the optical performance is on par w/the 17-55 due to the wider range(despite being an L-series).
Good luck w/your decision...

Mark

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads