Well I did it, I bought a 17-55mm f2.8 IS

Matblack · 17-07-2010, 13:02

I have a 17-55 2.8 IS on the way, admittedly second hand so a bit cheaper than the excessive new price but I've been researching lenses for a while and finally came to the conclusion that if I am going to be taking shots indoors that this is the lens for me.

Constant 2.8 3 stops of IS and L glass beating clarity, no it won't fit on a full frame but with the advent of the 7D I don't think I'll be going FF and if I do then not for a good while. it was this or the 24-105 f4 L glass which is about the same price secondhand. The 17-55 very rarely comes up I presume because those who have one keep it unless they go FF, it seems to be THE mid zoom for crop bodies.

Should be delivered on Tuesday hopefully it isn't the only thing being delivered this week so I'll have a subject to make the most of it

Consequently I think I'll be selling my Sigma 17-70 and probably the 28mm 2.8 as well, although I be keeping the 50mm 1.8 as it is such a cracking lens and much much lighter than the 17-55mm

It's a big investment but I think it will be worth it

MB

Kitten · 17-07-2010, 14:18

well you know who'll have the 28mm (and possibly the Sigma too) if you do sell it!

Congratulations, can't wait to see the pics!

Toby · 18-07-2010, 22:01

Congrats, I know you'll love it. I did exactly the same and went from the Sigma 17-70 to the Canon 17-55, albeit via the Sigma 24-60 which I was seriously underwhelmed by.

Enjoy

Mondo · 18-07-2010, 23:21

I wouldn't say its L beating but it is up there with the L zooms certainly.

It is the lens to get if you are on crop though.

Matblack · 20-07-2010, 16:40

The build quality isn't L but the pro reviewers are saying that it competes with and in some cases beats L lenses. Don't get me wrong if I was on a FF it would be L glass all the way but this gives me 2.8, IS and its cheaper then the set of Ls I'd need to cover the range. If I could afford it I'd be using 2.8 L glass as the build is a lot better and I just love that little red ring, but the advent of the 7D means my chances of going full frame are slim so this is the lens for me at the moment. It should arrive tomorrow and we'll see if it lives up to the reviews.

MB

lostkat · 21-07-2010, 07:09

I must admit, the price of this lens makes my eyes water but I'd be interested to see the results and whether you think the IS is needed. I've always thought it to be much more use on a telephoto zoom, but I guess it will be useful for indoor shots which you'll be doing a lot of. The 17-40 L is my next lens purchase of choice and I was suprised to see it was cheaper, although you can see why with F2.8 vs F4.0 .

Jonny69 · 21-07-2010, 12:10

So is this fixed at F2.8, ie you can't click it to F8 or smaller for longer exposures?

Mondo · 21-07-2010, 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonny69

So is this fixed at F2.8, ie you can't click it to F8 or smaller for longer exposures?

Nope, hence it's so expensive.

Mark · 21-07-2010, 22:34

Stops down as far as f/22 if you're so inclined.

Mondo · 21-07-2010, 22:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark

Stops down as far as f/22 if you're so inclined.

I don't think i've shot past f/5.6 in yearsssssssssssss.

17-07-2010, 13:02	#1
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	Well I did it, I bought a 17-55mm f2.8 IS I have a 17-55 2.8 IS on the way, admittedly second hand so a bit cheaper than the excessive new price but I've been researching lenses for a while and finally came to the conclusion that if I am going to be taking shots indoors that this is the lens for me. Constant 2.8 3 stops of IS and L glass beating clarity, no it won't fit on a full frame but with the advent of the 7D I don't think I'll be going FF and if I do then not for a good while. it was this or the 24-105 f4 L glass which is about the same price secondhand. The 17-55 very rarely comes up I presume because those who have one keep it unless they go FF, it seems to be THE mid zoom for crop bodies. Should be delivered on Tuesday hopefully it isn't the only thing being delivered this week so I'll have a subject to make the most of it Consequently I think I'll be selling my Sigma 17-70 and probably the 28mm 2.8 as well, although I be keeping the 50mm 1.8 as it is such a cracking lens and much much lighter than the 17-55mm It's a big investment but I think it will be worth it MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

17-07-2010, 14:18	#2
Kitten Spinky-Spank Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: 668. The Neighbour of the Beast Posts: 11,226	well you know who'll have the 28mm (and possibly the Sigma too) if you do sell it! Congratulations, can't wait to see the pics! __________________ "You only get one life. There's no God, no rules, except for those you accept or create for yourself. Then once it's over... it's over. Dreamless sleep for ever and ever. So why not be happy while you're here?" Nate Fisher

18-07-2010, 22:01	#3
Toby Absinthe Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,023	Congrats, I know you'll love it. I did exactly the same and went from the Sigma 17-70 to the Canon 17-55, albeit via the Sigma 24-60 which I was seriously underwhelmed by. Enjoy __________________

18-07-2010, 23:21	#4
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	I wouldn't say its L beating but it is up there with the L zooms certainly. It is the lens to get if you are on crop though. __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

20-07-2010, 16:40	#5
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	The build quality isn't L but the pro reviewers are saying that it competes with and in some cases beats L lenses. Don't get me wrong if I was on a FF it would be L glass all the way but this gives me 2.8, IS and its cheaper then the set of Ls I'd need to cover the range. If I could afford it I'd be using 2.8 L glass as the build is a lot better and I just love that little red ring, but the advent of the 7D means my chances of going full frame are slim so this is the lens for me at the moment. It should arrive tomorrow and we'll see if it lives up to the reviews. MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

21-07-2010, 07:09	#6
lostkat Good Cat Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 5,550	I must admit, the price of this lens makes my eyes water but I'd be interested to see the results and whether you think the IS is needed. I've always thought it to be much more use on a telephoto zoom, but I guess it will be useful for indoor shots which you'll be doing a lot of. The 17-40 L is my next lens purchase of choice and I was suprised to see it was cheaper, although you can see why with F2.8 vs F4.0 . __________________ Oooooh Cecil, what have you done?

21-07-2010, 12:10	#7
Jonny69 Noob Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Socialist Republik of Kent Posts: 5,032	So is this fixed at F2.8, ie you can't click it to F8 or smaller for longer exposures? __________________

21-07-2010, 22:34	#9
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	Stops down as far as f/22 if you're so inclined.