Frequently Bought Together
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
Product Description
From the Manufacturer
Designed to meet consumer demands for a fast EF-S zoom lens, the EF-S 17-55mm offers image quality on par with Canon's highly regarded L-series lenses. The lens features a large circular aperture that produces a shallow depth of field, creating background blur that draws special attention to the photographic subject. The lens construction, meanwhile, includes UD and aspherical elements that deliver impressive image quality throughout the entire zoom range. And thanks to the Image Stabilizer lens groups--which shift to compensate for camera shake--the image appears crisp and clear on the image plane, eve in dim light. Finally, the lens offers a ring-type ultra-sonic monitor (USM), inner focusing, and new AF algorithms to help achieve autofocus quickly and quietly, along with full-time mechanical manual focusing that makes it possible to manually adjust the focus even in AF mode. As with all Canon lenses, this lens carries a one-year warranty.
- Focal length: 17-55mm
- Maximum aperture: f/2.8
- Lens construction: 19 elements in 12 groups
- Diagonal angle of view: 78 degrees (at 30 feet) to 27 degrees (at 50 feet)
- Focus adjustment: AF with full-time manual
- Closest focusing distance: 1.15 feet
- Zoom system: 5-group helical zoom (front group moves 27mm)
- Filter size: 77mm
- Dimensions: 3.3 inches in diameter, 4.4 inches long
- Weight: 22.8 ounces
Product Description
To meet user demands for a fast EF-S zoom lens, Canon has specially designed a new lens with a large aperture of f/2.8 for select Canon Digital SLR cameras. The large circular aperture produces a shallow depth-of-field, creating background blur that draws attention to the photographic subject. The lens construction includes UD and aspherical elements, which deliver impressive image quality throughout the entire zoom range. Image Stabilizer lens groups shift to compensate for camera movement so that the image appears steady on the image plane, ensuring clear, crisp images, even in dim light. With a Ring-type USM, inner focusing and new AF algorithms, this lens achieves autofocus quickly and quietly, and with full-time mechanical manual focusing, manually adjusting the focus is possible even in AF mode.
Available Warranties for This Item
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
513 of 525 people found the following review helpful
Amazon Verified Purchase
I received my Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens today (12/28/06). It feels heavier by far than the 18-55mm kit lens, but lighter than I expected. Feels good (well-balanced) cradling the lens in the left hand near the base of the lens when mounted to my Canon Digital Rebel XT. I put the lens on the camera right away in a manner that would limit the opportunity for dust to intrude on the back of the lens or into the camera, since I've read about this lens not being sealed as well as "L" series Canon lenses. I may never take it off. 8-)
This lens focuses fast and sure--even in low light, no hunting around to lock onto a subject. Pictures taken with the camera hand-held at 1/10 to 1/15 sec shutter speeds inside with no flash were tack-sharp (Thanks to the IS). With F2.8 and IS, this lens opens up a whole new world of natural low-light photography. Not only are more inside shots possible, you also have the versatility to create gorgeous bokeh. You create these bokeh effects generally zoomed to 55mm (where the kit lens' max aperture is F5.6). Since the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 has a constant F2.8 max aperature, you don't have to worry about the depth of field increasing as you zoom. It is so confidence-inspiring to walk around and set your aperture where you want it to give you the depth of field you want, and not really worry about the shutter speed being too slow. Some of my outside dusk (low-light) shots at 1/6 sec shutter and F22 came out sharp (Thanks again to IS). I almost got vertigo when I first looked at my pics uploaded to my PC--they were so realistic. Images really pop!
The decision to go with this lens instead of some of the "L" grade lenses involved the following criteria:
1. Focal Length Range. I wanted at least the range of the 18-55mm kit lens.
2. Max Aperture. I wanted f/2.8, since f/4 is too confining for low-light situations. Also, f/4 doesn't give you the depth of field limiting ability of f/2.8. Trade-off is size and weight (and price).
3. Constant Max Aperture. I wanted a constant max aperture throughout the zoom range. I don't want to set the aperture and have the camera stop it down due to the max aperture decreasing as you zoom in (as is the case with the kit lens).
4. USM. I wanted the Ultrasonic Motor (USM) feature, since this is known to be the fastest and quietest autofocus technology.
5. IS. I wanted Image Stabilization (IS), since this effectively makes your lens faster, because you can shoot in lower light at lower shutter speeds without fear of blur (provided the subject is still). Also, zoomed-into 55mm, camera shake can be more of a problem than at shorter focal lengths. IS has got you covered there as well. This lens only has one IS mode (no mode for panning).
6. Full Format or Crop-optimized. It is true that going with a full format lens would mean that you could use it on any DSLR (35mm film, APS-C DSLR, and Full Format DSLRs such as the 5D and 1Ds Mark II). However, full format lenses are not optimized for the 1.6x crop of the Canon DSLRs Rebel through 30D. The crop-optimized lenses (designated by the "EF-S" in the model name) are tailored to the smaller image sensors of the APS-C camera bodies. The lens elements and coatings are designed to minimize the ghosting and flare that can come from reflections off of the image sensors in digital cameras. Also, the crop-optimized lenses tend to be smaller, lighter and less expensive than otherwise identical full format lenses. I considered the EF 17-40mm f/4L, the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L and the EF 24-105mm f/4L. But, none of these had the focal length range I wanted, and two of them weren't fast enough (f/4), and the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L was very heavy (2.1 lbs). I determined there was no need to sacrifice performance now for some possible benefit later on if I purchase a full format camera. If I ever do, I would hope there would be full format lenses that have been designed to limit chromatic aberrations and introduce other digital optimizations currently provided by the crop-optimized APS-C format-only lenses. Besides, you can always continue to use your old camera and lens as a back-up, or you can sell them to help purchase the new ones.
7. Grade ("L" series or Advanced Amature). Of course, if all else is equal, take the "L" lens with the red stripe. But, all else is not equal. I'd rather have an optically superior lens that is well-built (although not as well as an "L" series) that meets all my other criteria, and just be careful to keep the dust out. The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 is expensive (I paid $[...] on [...]). But, I'm sure if there were an "L" series version of this lens, it would be even more expensive.
Conclusion: This is one great lens! There's nothing else out there for 1.6x crop digital cameras that gives you the sweet spot of zoom range, low light capability, depth of field control, image stabilization, fast and quiet auto-focus, and superior image quality rivaling prime lenses. And to put the considerable weight (22.8 oz.) into perspective, it is still 3.8 oz. lighter than the very good digital-only Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8, and the Nikon does not even have image stabilization (and costs more to boot). Game, set and match!
UPDATE 2/3/07: I've taken 1000+ pictures. I'm impressed with battery life given that I thought IS would use a lot of power. But, since flash is nearly never needed (due to f/2.8 and IS), battery life has seemingly been extended. I didn't realize how much I would grow to expect a stable image through the viewfinder until I looked through a viewfinder with a lens without IS and saw the image shaking. Note that cameras with built-in image sensors (such as Sony Alpha) don't stabilize the viewfinder. The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM autofocus locks-on amazingly fast even in low light. No apparent optical weak spots at any focal length or aperture. Lens hood (optional) eliminated most, but not all, flares from bright sun. I think this is the best, most versatile walk-around lens you can get. I wish Canon would make an EF-S 55-200mm f/2.8 IS USM lens to pair it with so I could zoom in closer on distant wildlife, etc.
This lens focuses fast and sure--even in low light, no hunting around to lock onto a subject. Pictures taken with the camera hand-held at 1/10 to 1/15 sec shutter speeds inside with no flash were tack-sharp (Thanks to the IS). With F2.8 and IS, this lens opens up a whole new world of natural low-light photography. Not only are more inside shots possible, you also have the versatility to create gorgeous bokeh. You create these bokeh effects generally zoomed to 55mm (where the kit lens' max aperture is F5.6). Since the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 has a constant F2.8 max aperature, you don't have to worry about the depth of field increasing as you zoom. It is so confidence-inspiring to walk around and set your aperture where you want it to give you the depth of field you want, and not really worry about the shutter speed being too slow. Some of my outside dusk (low-light) shots at 1/6 sec shutter and F22 came out sharp (Thanks again to IS). I almost got vertigo when I first looked at my pics uploaded to my PC--they were so realistic. Images really pop!
The decision to go with this lens instead of some of the "L" grade lenses involved the following criteria:
1. Focal Length Range. I wanted at least the range of the 18-55mm kit lens.
2. Max Aperture. I wanted f/2.8, since f/4 is too confining for low-light situations. Also, f/4 doesn't give you the depth of field limiting ability of f/2.8. Trade-off is size and weight (and price).
3. Constant Max Aperture. I wanted a constant max aperture throughout the zoom range. I don't want to set the aperture and have the camera stop it down due to the max aperture decreasing as you zoom in (as is the case with the kit lens).
4. USM. I wanted the Ultrasonic Motor (USM) feature, since this is known to be the fastest and quietest autofocus technology.
5. IS. I wanted Image Stabilization (IS), since this effectively makes your lens faster, because you can shoot in lower light at lower shutter speeds without fear of blur (provided the subject is still). Also, zoomed-into 55mm, camera shake can be more of a problem than at shorter focal lengths. IS has got you covered there as well. This lens only has one IS mode (no mode for panning).
6. Full Format or Crop-optimized. It is true that going with a full format lens would mean that you could use it on any DSLR (35mm film, APS-C DSLR, and Full Format DSLRs such as the 5D and 1Ds Mark II). However, full format lenses are not optimized for the 1.6x crop of the Canon DSLRs Rebel through 30D. The crop-optimized lenses (designated by the "EF-S" in the model name) are tailored to the smaller image sensors of the APS-C camera bodies. The lens elements and coatings are designed to minimize the ghosting and flare that can come from reflections off of the image sensors in digital cameras. Also, the crop-optimized lenses tend to be smaller, lighter and less expensive than otherwise identical full format lenses. I considered the EF 17-40mm f/4L, the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L and the EF 24-105mm f/4L. But, none of these had the focal length range I wanted, and two of them weren't fast enough (f/4), and the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L was very heavy (2.1 lbs). I determined there was no need to sacrifice performance now for some possible benefit later on if I purchase a full format camera. If I ever do, I would hope there would be full format lenses that have been designed to limit chromatic aberrations and introduce other digital optimizations currently provided by the crop-optimized APS-C format-only lenses. Besides, you can always continue to use your old camera and lens as a back-up, or you can sell them to help purchase the new ones.
7. Grade ("L" series or Advanced Amature). Of course, if all else is equal, take the "L" lens with the red stripe. But, all else is not equal. I'd rather have an optically superior lens that is well-built (although not as well as an "L" series) that meets all my other criteria, and just be careful to keep the dust out. The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 is expensive (I paid $[...] on [...]). But, I'm sure if there were an "L" series version of this lens, it would be even more expensive.
Conclusion: This is one great lens! There's nothing else out there for 1.6x crop digital cameras that gives you the sweet spot of zoom range, low light capability, depth of field control, image stabilization, fast and quiet auto-focus, and superior image quality rivaling prime lenses. And to put the considerable weight (22.8 oz.) into perspective, it is still 3.8 oz. lighter than the very good digital-only Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8, and the Nikon does not even have image stabilization (and costs more to boot). Game, set and match!
UPDATE 2/3/07: I've taken 1000+ pictures. I'm impressed with battery life given that I thought IS would use a lot of power. But, since flash is nearly never needed (due to f/2.8 and IS), battery life has seemingly been extended. I didn't realize how much I would grow to expect a stable image through the viewfinder until I looked through a viewfinder with a lens without IS and saw the image shaking. Note that cameras with built-in image sensors (such as Sony Alpha) don't stabilize the viewfinder. The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM autofocus locks-on amazingly fast even in low light. No apparent optical weak spots at any focal length or aperture. Lens hood (optional) eliminated most, but not all, flares from bright sun. I think this is the best, most versatile walk-around lens you can get. I wish Canon would make an EF-S 55-200mm f/2.8 IS USM lens to pair it with so I could zoom in closer on distant wildlife, etc.
526 of 542 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
Upgrading your lens for Rebel XTi? 17-85 USM IS vs 28-135 USM IS vs 17-55 2.8f USM IS vs 24-105 4.0f USM IS
January 8, 2008
By Uwe Weinkauf
Folks, I know you want it short. But I am covering quite a bit of information and condensed it so that you can get good information and are able to digest it in less than 5 min.
It is quite surprising how many people are being "tortured" with the question on which lens is the right lens when it comes to finding the perfect lens to upgrade the Canon XTi Rebel kit lens (18-55) or even for the Canon 40D (which is often sold with the 28-135 USM IS lens).
I read about 500+ reviews and many of them I found very interesting but really did not answer my question on what a good lens is for the Rebel XTi... and with good reasons because YOU have to know what you want or need and then make a call. Here were the criteria I used and I hope you can leverage from these:
1. I wanted a lens which has a great picture quality to have a true upgrade feeling from the Canon 18-55 kit lens (during day light that lens is actually very good and with its light weight is a great carry around lens - however in low light or for really nice portrait shots this lens has limitations not to mention its built quality)
2. I wanted a versatile "Walk Around" lens with good zoom range to cover most of the picture I take (landscape and portraits) in addition to my telephoto lens (70-300mm)
3. If possible a low weight lens - however image quality was a higher priority for me
4. I wanted a Canon lens (though there are very good alternatives from Tamron and Sigma - however they have some disadvantages but given the lower price worth considering)
5. I wanted an Image Stabilizer (IS) and a low noise focus motor, i.e. Canon's USM
Many people are looking for a great "Walk Around" lens to avoid changing lenses all the time yet at the same time want great picture qualities. So, your criteria may be different and therefore your choice certainly a good one may differ from mine.
As one disclaimer upfront - I am not going into the professional details, i.e. vignetting differeneces at different aperture values or zoom ranges - to make it simple for many readers in this field who just want to make a good decision to buy a great lens without going through the trouble of returning lenses.
You will find many reviews on the cropped camera lenses (EF-S) and still people often don't get it right. So, if you have a cropped camera like the Canon Rebel XTi or Canon 40D then the cropped factor is 1.6. In other words no matter what lens you put on these cameras you will get the following zoom ranges which are different from the product names for the lenses:
Canon Lens Min Zoom Max Zoom
17-85: 27.2 - 136
28-135: 44.8 - 216
17-55 f2.8: 27.2 - 88
24-105 f4.0 L: 38.4 - 168
Source: Canon's website
I went through the extra burden of testing all the lenses myself and not just rely on reviews. So, I went ahead and rented them for 1-2 days and then made up my own verdict so to speak. I also took pictures in similar conditions, looked at them on the computer and printed them out to compare the lenses:
1) The first upgrade lens from Canon which comes to mind is the EF-S 17-85 USM IS f3.5-5.6 lens. This lens would have been a great kit lens but did not meet my requirements for an upgrade lens. It has a very good zoom range and it is still light weight. But the image quality is not as sharp as I would like it to be. And if you commit to spend more money (like $500 for this lens) then you don't want to waste it by just getting a bit more zoom range and an Image Stabilizer.
2) The first lens I actually tried was the EF 24-105 f4.0 USM IS L (luxurious) lens from Canon and I was really happy about the image quality. I was very close to buy this lens but wanted to check out other lenses first. Following drawbacks for me: it is not a wide-angle lens which is useful for landscape shots or even travels shots when you can't afford walking back 5-10 feet. Plus a wide angel lens can give you a nice effect on the picture itself. Another drawback is the aperture value of f4.0 in low light. An aperture factor of f2.8 is faster in low light (the lower the value the larger the aperture - think the Iris of your eye is getting larger and therefore you can see better in low light) and with a running kid or pet at home that is a true advantage. However, with the Image Stabilizer this would not be a big issue. (For more advanced people you can stop down one step to get enough light into the lens in low light conditions but if the object is in motion that may be tricky.)
A big plus however is the option to use this lens for any non-cropped canon camera. However, I am ok with using the Rebel XTi and if I want to upgrade to another body later then the 40D would be a great way to go. So, I don't mind to buy EF-S lenses. The EF-S lenses have the advantage that they are generally lighter weight than the full frame lenses.
3) The EF 28-135 USM IS f3.5-5.6 lens has a great zoom range (44-216) but does not have a wide angle (basically anything less than 35mm). However, if zoom range is your top criteria then I'd get the 24-105 L lens without a doubt over this 28-135 lens. For example when you are in full zoom and you are not in bright daylight your pictures will not be as sharp. I tried this lens and the image quality is simply not as good as the 24-105 L lens or the 17-55 f2.8 lens. The 24-105 is also more solidly built. It is a lot of metal built with this lens and it is sealed against dust and water. However, if budget is a constrain to you then the Canon 28-135 lens is a better option for you and according to many folks out there considered to be a better choice than even the EF-S 17-85 USM IS lens.
4) The EF-S 17-55 f2.8 USM IS lens was the last lens I tested and chose over the other three lenses. First, my expectations toward a great image quality (like the 24-105 L lens) were fully met. This lens is using similar components like the L lenses (but it is not fully sealed like the 24-105 L lens is) and shoots extremely well in low light conditions. Plus for a f2.8 (main advantage is large aperture which is very useful for taking great shots in dim lights and faster than f4.0 lenses). Also this lens has less weight (640g) in comparison to the Canon 24-70 EF L f2.8 lens (950g). So, you get a great lens with an acceptable weight. Even the zoom range is fully acceptable to me on my Rebel XTi which comes to 27-88mm. I can take very good portraits shots (without hitting someone's nose with the lens if you will) and it has very nice blur as well (meaning a sharp face in the front and with a blurry background). The only drawback is a flare on some pictures at the bottom of the image when you take pictures using its built-in flash due to the larger lens diameter. However you can either put a better (external) flash light or use Photoshop to correct this issue. I am not a professional photographer and for me this is ok. If you are a professional photographer then you are most likely not as interested in this article anyways.
+++Summary+++
The bottom line is that for a true upgrade lens to your kit lens for the Rebel XTi I would recommend the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS USM lens. It is worth the investment. This type of lens along with any other L lenses from Canon will always keep its value and you can certainly sell this lens a lot easier if that is the final information you were looking for... ;)
I hope this article helps you in directing your decision on which lens to buy. If you are still not sure about what to do then I can only recommend testing the lenses of your choice in a store or ideally rent them or ask your buddies to lend you a lens for a few days.
Good luck and enjoy taking great pictures to treasure your memories!
Uwe
It is quite surprising how many people are being "tortured" with the question on which lens is the right lens when it comes to finding the perfect lens to upgrade the Canon XTi Rebel kit lens (18-55) or even for the Canon 40D (which is often sold with the 28-135 USM IS lens).
I read about 500+ reviews and many of them I found very interesting but really did not answer my question on what a good lens is for the Rebel XTi... and with good reasons because YOU have to know what you want or need and then make a call. Here were the criteria I used and I hope you can leverage from these:
1. I wanted a lens which has a great picture quality to have a true upgrade feeling from the Canon 18-55 kit lens (during day light that lens is actually very good and with its light weight is a great carry around lens - however in low light or for really nice portrait shots this lens has limitations not to mention its built quality)
2. I wanted a versatile "Walk Around" lens with good zoom range to cover most of the picture I take (landscape and portraits) in addition to my telephoto lens (70-300mm)
3. If possible a low weight lens - however image quality was a higher priority for me
4. I wanted a Canon lens (though there are very good alternatives from Tamron and Sigma - however they have some disadvantages but given the lower price worth considering)
5. I wanted an Image Stabilizer (IS) and a low noise focus motor, i.e. Canon's USM
Many people are looking for a great "Walk Around" lens to avoid changing lenses all the time yet at the same time want great picture qualities. So, your criteria may be different and therefore your choice certainly a good one may differ from mine.
As one disclaimer upfront - I am not going into the professional details, i.e. vignetting differeneces at different aperture values or zoom ranges - to make it simple for many readers in this field who just want to make a good decision to buy a great lens without going through the trouble of returning lenses.
You will find many reviews on the cropped camera lenses (EF-S) and still people often don't get it right. So, if you have a cropped camera like the Canon Rebel XTi or Canon 40D then the cropped factor is 1.6. In other words no matter what lens you put on these cameras you will get the following zoom ranges which are different from the product names for the lenses:
Canon Lens Min Zoom Max Zoom
17-85: 27.2 - 136
28-135: 44.8 - 216
17-55 f2.8: 27.2 - 88
24-105 f4.0 L: 38.4 - 168
Source: Canon's website
I went through the extra burden of testing all the lenses myself and not just rely on reviews. So, I went ahead and rented them for 1-2 days and then made up my own verdict so to speak. I also took pictures in similar conditions, looked at them on the computer and printed them out to compare the lenses:
1) The first upgrade lens from Canon which comes to mind is the EF-S 17-85 USM IS f3.5-5.6 lens. This lens would have been a great kit lens but did not meet my requirements for an upgrade lens. It has a very good zoom range and it is still light weight. But the image quality is not as sharp as I would like it to be. And if you commit to spend more money (like $500 for this lens) then you don't want to waste it by just getting a bit more zoom range and an Image Stabilizer.
2) The first lens I actually tried was the EF 24-105 f4.0 USM IS L (luxurious) lens from Canon and I was really happy about the image quality. I was very close to buy this lens but wanted to check out other lenses first. Following drawbacks for me: it is not a wide-angle lens which is useful for landscape shots or even travels shots when you can't afford walking back 5-10 feet. Plus a wide angel lens can give you a nice effect on the picture itself. Another drawback is the aperture value of f4.0 in low light. An aperture factor of f2.8 is faster in low light (the lower the value the larger the aperture - think the Iris of your eye is getting larger and therefore you can see better in low light) and with a running kid or pet at home that is a true advantage. However, with the Image Stabilizer this would not be a big issue. (For more advanced people you can stop down one step to get enough light into the lens in low light conditions but if the object is in motion that may be tricky.)
A big plus however is the option to use this lens for any non-cropped canon camera. However, I am ok with using the Rebel XTi and if I want to upgrade to another body later then the 40D would be a great way to go. So, I don't mind to buy EF-S lenses. The EF-S lenses have the advantage that they are generally lighter weight than the full frame lenses.
3) The EF 28-135 USM IS f3.5-5.6 lens has a great zoom range (44-216) but does not have a wide angle (basically anything less than 35mm). However, if zoom range is your top criteria then I'd get the 24-105 L lens without a doubt over this 28-135 lens. For example when you are in full zoom and you are not in bright daylight your pictures will not be as sharp. I tried this lens and the image quality is simply not as good as the 24-105 L lens or the 17-55 f2.8 lens. The 24-105 is also more solidly built. It is a lot of metal built with this lens and it is sealed against dust and water. However, if budget is a constrain to you then the Canon 28-135 lens is a better option for you and according to many folks out there considered to be a better choice than even the EF-S 17-85 USM IS lens.
4) The EF-S 17-55 f2.8 USM IS lens was the last lens I tested and chose over the other three lenses. First, my expectations toward a great image quality (like the 24-105 L lens) were fully met. This lens is using similar components like the L lenses (but it is not fully sealed like the 24-105 L lens is) and shoots extremely well in low light conditions. Plus for a f2.8 (main advantage is large aperture which is very useful for taking great shots in dim lights and faster than f4.0 lenses). Also this lens has less weight (640g) in comparison to the Canon 24-70 EF L f2.8 lens (950g). So, you get a great lens with an acceptable weight. Even the zoom range is fully acceptable to me on my Rebel XTi which comes to 27-88mm. I can take very good portraits shots (without hitting someone's nose with the lens if you will) and it has very nice blur as well (meaning a sharp face in the front and with a blurry background). The only drawback is a flare on some pictures at the bottom of the image when you take pictures using its built-in flash due to the larger lens diameter. However you can either put a better (external) flash light or use Photoshop to correct this issue. I am not a professional photographer and for me this is ok. If you are a professional photographer then you are most likely not as interested in this article anyways.
+++Summary+++
The bottom line is that for a true upgrade lens to your kit lens for the Rebel XTi I would recommend the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS USM lens. It is worth the investment. This type of lens along with any other L lenses from Canon will always keep its value and you can certainly sell this lens a lot easier if that is the final information you were looking for... ;)
I hope this article helps you in directing your decision on which lens to buy. If you are still not sure about what to do then I can only recommend testing the lenses of your choice in a store or ideally rent them or ask your buddies to lend you a lens for a few days.
Good luck and enjoy taking great pictures to treasure your memories!
Uwe
176 of 185 people found the following review helpful
11-3-2008 Update:
I now have a single spec of dust inside the corner of this lens under the front element. Hope this is not a trend. I am now using this lens mainly in dust free in-door environments and my Canon 24-70 F/2.8 which is sealed for outdoor dusty areas.
I just got this fantastic low light lens last week. Will be adding more comments as time permits.
This lens has quickly become one of my most used lens. It's the lens I would choose if I could just choose one to shoot a wedding with and I'm free to approach the bride and groom during any part of the ceremony. It's also THE one lens I would choose to take on a vacation, it's that versatile. I love the part where I can walk into a dark cathedral and hand hold a shot at 1 second and it's razor sharp. What a lens!!!
Pros:
Sharp even at F/2.8
No internal dust so far
Great zoom ring location and size
Very pleasing shots with nice Bokah
Auto focus perfect! Silent quick lock even in dim conditions
Image Stabilization let's you get those shots you couldn't get otherwise.
Auto Lens Vignetting correction using peripheral Illumination control see Auto Vignetting comments below:
Cons:
Cheap plastic construction
No dust yet but I am concerned
Some Chromatic Aberration (CA) at 17mm
No included lens hood? Give me a break Canon!
Really poor zoom feel grabs between 23 and 35mm
Front of lens extends inward and outward when zooming in and out
I bought this lens to take low light portraits during weddings. My initial impression is that this lens will be perfect. I even managed to pull off a 2 second exposure that was pretty sharp hand held which I would never be able to do otherwise. I will use it at the extreme in 55mm for nice bokah and a softer shot then keep it between 20mm to 48mm for the sharper shots.
What a disappointment to pay over $1,000 for a lens and have such a poor feeling zoom. It grabs at each end and just plain feels cheap. Makes my Canon 17-40 F4 L lens zoom feel like it's perfect as it is silky smooth. But, the 17-55 F/2.8 IS does something I could not do with the 17-40. I was at a bar the other night shooting a benefit auction using just available bar light and already at 1600 ISO and the Canon 17-40 wide open just could not get the shot. With the 17-55 F/2.8 IS not only do you have the faster aperture F/2.8 but I can get shot after hand held shot at a half a second something I could not come close to with the 17-40.
All in all though except for the zoom and construction this lens really does rock when you look at the photos. Between 20mm and 40mm it is sharper then the 17-40 at any comparable F stop. So don't let my cons keep you from getting this lens. If you need low light shots in the 17-55 range this is your only option in a zoom. It's a shame that Canon does not offer an L lens that's 17-55 F/2.8 with IS. I would have gladly paid $1500 for an L lens. In the long lens range there are tons of choices from Canon that are L lens. It's true what they say Canon owns the long lens but come up a little short with the wide angles
I do my first wedding next Saturday with this lens, time will tell if it's a keeper. Will post updates in the coming weeks.
3-25-2008 Update
What a great lens, after reviewing wedding photos yesterday with my clients I have to agree the photos just pop in color and the sharpness is crazy with this lens between 20 and 50mm even wide open which is what I shot most of the time. The bokeh though not as good as my Canon 85mm F/1.2 and Canon 135mm F2 is still pleasing and unlike the two primes I can stand in one place during the wedding and zoom in and out for different points of view.
What ever you do don't even confuse this F/2.8 IS lens with the basic kit lens. It is truly except for the lack of weather sealing and poor zoom feel an L lens in photo quality!
4-8-2008 Update
Still no dust thank God! I am taking it to a local park to photograph our company party this weekend and it's very dusty there. Should be a good chance to see if the lens is going to be a dust hog or not. The zoom even seems to breaking in a little and is now just a little smoother, nothing like my L lens zooms but better then when new. Still loving this lens and in fact if I had to choose just one lens to do a wedding this would of course be it, it's the most versatile and easiest to use by far!
5-21-2008 Update
Still NOT one single spec of dust in this lens. I have been using outdoor at the park and on outdoor weddings the last 5 weekends in a row and not a single spec of dust despite being in extremely dusty Mesa Arizona. I am constantly amazed at what this lens can get away with in low light. We were shooting the reception to an outdoor wedding well after sundown and I was hanging in there with my Canon 40D and a 85mm F/1.2 L II at 3200 ISO shooting close ups. My daughter was shooting at the same time covering the wide angle photo ops with this Canon 17-55 F/2.8 IS and was getting shots here and there at 1600 ISO with her Rebel of the crowd as long as people were still even up to the point of a full second exposure. This was well after it was too dark to be taking photos without flash but we were still getting photos (we hate flash too unflattering and flat) Simply AMAZING!
6-30-2008 Update
This lens still has not a spec of dust! And it has become one of my most used lens. It's the lens I would choose if I could just choose one to shoot a wedding with and I'm free to approach the bride and groom during any part of the ceremony. It's also THE one lens I would choose to take on a vacation, it's that versatile. I love the part where I can walk into a dark cathedral and hand hold a shot at 1 second and it's razor sharp. What a lens!!!
9-5-2008 Update
This is by far and away my most used lens now. It's the lens that stays on my Canon 40D 90% of the time. I just went with my wife to the Arizona Museum of Natural History and wanted to take photos inside without using flash. I love that natural look and hate the flatness of flash. I shot almost the entire museum at F/2.8 and ISO 800 sometimes ISO 400 without a monopod or tripod. That's something I could not have done with my Canon 24-70 F/2.8. As a plus the 17-55 EF-S IS F/2.8 lens is much lighter then my 24-70. If it feels like I am gushing over this lens it's because I am. And it's a dead spot in Canon's lineup. As of this writing they don't have a single wide angle L lens with Image Stabilization and that's a crying shame. Also I tried shooting some fireworks this weekend WITHOUT a tripod!! I managed up to 3 seconds exposure by leaning against a light pole and got some decent shots. Again without the IS there is no way you could get such shots. My only regret is that I didn't get this lens earlier Oh and it would be nice if it was sealed, but I still have not a single spec of dust on the inside!!
9-12-2008 Update Canon EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 IS vs Canon 24-70 F/2.8 L:
I am taking photos tonight of a stage special and again will need to use both my Canon 17-55 F/2.8 IS lens and my Canon 24-70 F/2.8 L lens since my daughter and I will be shooting at the same time. I can't help comparing the two again. The 17-55 feels much lighter but at the same time feels so much cheaper in the hand between the cheap plastic feel the grabbing in the center of the zoom and the plastic build. The 24-70 feels like a heavy quality jewel that will last two life times or more and it's weather sealed. Still if you have to carry the 24-70 around for a few hours you wish for the lighter weight of the 17-55. The 17-55 has a wider view but the 24-70 has more reach. The 17-55 seems sharper throughout the range but seems to have just a little less contrast and slightly cooler colors then the 24-70. The zoom on my 24-70 is now almost broken in and feels smooth as silk and totally professional the 17-55 zoom feels like a cheap plastic toy. The 17-55 has image stabilization and the 24-70 does not so I end up using a monopod for most dark shots with the 24-70. The 17-55 is an EF-S and will not fit a full frame camera, the 24-70 will. I'm thinking forward to the future when I will be adding a full frame Canon camera body to my collection and I think the 24-70 will be perfect on that camera.
9-16-2008 Update:
I've noticed this lens has some Chromatic Aberration (CA) at 17mm. When in a clean room taking photos of semi-conductor manufacturing equipment you have to zoom wide to get everything in the photo and that's when I noticed this lens especially under fluorescent lighting taking photos of highly reflect surfaces has a problem. So much so that I retook the photos with my Canon 17-40 F/4 L lens and was astounded at how much better the photos looked. Normally my 17-55 F/2.8 IS looks better then the 17-40 but in this case with macro and up close mechanical photos zoomed out to 17 the 17-40 really looked much better. When out shooting landscapes in daylight this has never been a problem with the 17-55 IS F/2.8. So take note if you take macro shots at 17mm under fluorescent lights you may want a different lens. Otherwise the 17-55 F/2.8 IS is an absolute stunner!!!
11-3-2008 Update:
I now have a single spec of dust inside the corner of this lens under the front element.
Auto Vignetting peripheral illumination control:
Canon has this super sweet Auto Lens Vignetting correction that works with this lens both in camera with JPEG's and in RAW using peripheral Illumination control in Canon Digital Photo Professional (DPP) when using newer Canon digital EOS cameras (Canon Rebel XSi, 40D, 5D Mark II etc.) . Read more ›
I now have a single spec of dust inside the corner of this lens under the front element. Hope this is not a trend. I am now using this lens mainly in dust free in-door environments and my Canon 24-70 F/2.8 which is sealed for outdoor dusty areas.
I just got this fantastic low light lens last week. Will be adding more comments as time permits.
This lens has quickly become one of my most used lens. It's the lens I would choose if I could just choose one to shoot a wedding with and I'm free to approach the bride and groom during any part of the ceremony. It's also THE one lens I would choose to take on a vacation, it's that versatile. I love the part where I can walk into a dark cathedral and hand hold a shot at 1 second and it's razor sharp. What a lens!!!
Pros:
Sharp even at F/2.8
No internal dust so far
Great zoom ring location and size
Very pleasing shots with nice Bokah
Auto focus perfect! Silent quick lock even in dim conditions
Image Stabilization let's you get those shots you couldn't get otherwise.
Auto Lens Vignetting correction using peripheral Illumination control see Auto Vignetting comments below:
Cons:
Cheap plastic construction
No dust yet but I am concerned
Some Chromatic Aberration (CA) at 17mm
No included lens hood? Give me a break Canon!
Really poor zoom feel grabs between 23 and 35mm
Front of lens extends inward and outward when zooming in and out
I bought this lens to take low light portraits during weddings. My initial impression is that this lens will be perfect. I even managed to pull off a 2 second exposure that was pretty sharp hand held which I would never be able to do otherwise. I will use it at the extreme in 55mm for nice bokah and a softer shot then keep it between 20mm to 48mm for the sharper shots.
What a disappointment to pay over $1,000 for a lens and have such a poor feeling zoom. It grabs at each end and just plain feels cheap. Makes my Canon 17-40 F4 L lens zoom feel like it's perfect as it is silky smooth. But, the 17-55 F/2.8 IS does something I could not do with the 17-40. I was at a bar the other night shooting a benefit auction using just available bar light and already at 1600 ISO and the Canon 17-40 wide open just could not get the shot. With the 17-55 F/2.8 IS not only do you have the faster aperture F/2.8 but I can get shot after hand held shot at a half a second something I could not come close to with the 17-40.
All in all though except for the zoom and construction this lens really does rock when you look at the photos. Between 20mm and 40mm it is sharper then the 17-40 at any comparable F stop. So don't let my cons keep you from getting this lens. If you need low light shots in the 17-55 range this is your only option in a zoom. It's a shame that Canon does not offer an L lens that's 17-55 F/2.8 with IS. I would have gladly paid $1500 for an L lens. In the long lens range there are tons of choices from Canon that are L lens. It's true what they say Canon owns the long lens but come up a little short with the wide angles
I do my first wedding next Saturday with this lens, time will tell if it's a keeper. Will post updates in the coming weeks.
3-25-2008 Update
What a great lens, after reviewing wedding photos yesterday with my clients I have to agree the photos just pop in color and the sharpness is crazy with this lens between 20 and 50mm even wide open which is what I shot most of the time. The bokeh though not as good as my Canon 85mm F/1.2 and Canon 135mm F2 is still pleasing and unlike the two primes I can stand in one place during the wedding and zoom in and out for different points of view.
What ever you do don't even confuse this F/2.8 IS lens with the basic kit lens. It is truly except for the lack of weather sealing and poor zoom feel an L lens in photo quality!
4-8-2008 Update
Still no dust thank God! I am taking it to a local park to photograph our company party this weekend and it's very dusty there. Should be a good chance to see if the lens is going to be a dust hog or not. The zoom even seems to breaking in a little and is now just a little smoother, nothing like my L lens zooms but better then when new. Still loving this lens and in fact if I had to choose just one lens to do a wedding this would of course be it, it's the most versatile and easiest to use by far!
5-21-2008 Update
Still NOT one single spec of dust in this lens. I have been using outdoor at the park and on outdoor weddings the last 5 weekends in a row and not a single spec of dust despite being in extremely dusty Mesa Arizona. I am constantly amazed at what this lens can get away with in low light. We were shooting the reception to an outdoor wedding well after sundown and I was hanging in there with my Canon 40D and a 85mm F/1.2 L II at 3200 ISO shooting close ups. My daughter was shooting at the same time covering the wide angle photo ops with this Canon 17-55 F/2.8 IS and was getting shots here and there at 1600 ISO with her Rebel of the crowd as long as people were still even up to the point of a full second exposure. This was well after it was too dark to be taking photos without flash but we were still getting photos (we hate flash too unflattering and flat) Simply AMAZING!
6-30-2008 Update
This lens still has not a spec of dust! And it has become one of my most used lens. It's the lens I would choose if I could just choose one to shoot a wedding with and I'm free to approach the bride and groom during any part of the ceremony. It's also THE one lens I would choose to take on a vacation, it's that versatile. I love the part where I can walk into a dark cathedral and hand hold a shot at 1 second and it's razor sharp. What a lens!!!
9-5-2008 Update
This is by far and away my most used lens now. It's the lens that stays on my Canon 40D 90% of the time. I just went with my wife to the Arizona Museum of Natural History and wanted to take photos inside without using flash. I love that natural look and hate the flatness of flash. I shot almost the entire museum at F/2.8 and ISO 800 sometimes ISO 400 without a monopod or tripod. That's something I could not have done with my Canon 24-70 F/2.8. As a plus the 17-55 EF-S IS F/2.8 lens is much lighter then my 24-70. If it feels like I am gushing over this lens it's because I am. And it's a dead spot in Canon's lineup. As of this writing they don't have a single wide angle L lens with Image Stabilization and that's a crying shame. Also I tried shooting some fireworks this weekend WITHOUT a tripod!! I managed up to 3 seconds exposure by leaning against a light pole and got some decent shots. Again without the IS there is no way you could get such shots. My only regret is that I didn't get this lens earlier Oh and it would be nice if it was sealed, but I still have not a single spec of dust on the inside!!
9-12-2008 Update Canon EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 IS vs Canon 24-70 F/2.8 L:
I am taking photos tonight of a stage special and again will need to use both my Canon 17-55 F/2.8 IS lens and my Canon 24-70 F/2.8 L lens since my daughter and I will be shooting at the same time. I can't help comparing the two again. The 17-55 feels much lighter but at the same time feels so much cheaper in the hand between the cheap plastic feel the grabbing in the center of the zoom and the plastic build. The 24-70 feels like a heavy quality jewel that will last two life times or more and it's weather sealed. Still if you have to carry the 24-70 around for a few hours you wish for the lighter weight of the 17-55. The 17-55 has a wider view but the 24-70 has more reach. The 17-55 seems sharper throughout the range but seems to have just a little less contrast and slightly cooler colors then the 24-70. The zoom on my 24-70 is now almost broken in and feels smooth as silk and totally professional the 17-55 zoom feels like a cheap plastic toy. The 17-55 has image stabilization and the 24-70 does not so I end up using a monopod for most dark shots with the 24-70. The 17-55 is an EF-S and will not fit a full frame camera, the 24-70 will. I'm thinking forward to the future when I will be adding a full frame Canon camera body to my collection and I think the 24-70 will be perfect on that camera.
9-16-2008 Update:
I've noticed this lens has some Chromatic Aberration (CA) at 17mm. When in a clean room taking photos of semi-conductor manufacturing equipment you have to zoom wide to get everything in the photo and that's when I noticed this lens especially under fluorescent lighting taking photos of highly reflect surfaces has a problem. So much so that I retook the photos with my Canon 17-40 F/4 L lens and was astounded at how much better the photos looked. Normally my 17-55 F/2.8 IS looks better then the 17-40 but in this case with macro and up close mechanical photos zoomed out to 17 the 17-40 really looked much better. When out shooting landscapes in daylight this has never been a problem with the 17-55 IS F/2.8. So take note if you take macro shots at 17mm under fluorescent lights you may want a different lens. Otherwise the 17-55 F/2.8 IS is an absolute stunner!!!
11-3-2008 Update:
I now have a single spec of dust inside the corner of this lens under the front element.
Auto Vignetting peripheral illumination control:
Canon has this super sweet Auto Lens Vignetting correction that works with this lens both in camera with JPEG's and in RAW using peripheral Illumination control in Canon Digital Photo Professional (DPP) when using newer Canon digital EOS cameras (Canon Rebel XSi, 40D, 5D Mark II etc.) . Read more ›
Most Recent Customer Reviews
5.0 out of 5 stars
This lense rocks!
As a parent and amateur photographer, this lens is so worth it. After reading reviews on Amazon about how this lens is a must for parents, I decided to step-up from the kit lens. Read more
Published 26 days ago by John M.
5.0 out of 5 stars
Great Everyday Lens
I am just learning and this is the lens that stays on my camera everyday. I love the background blur on my food shots.
Published 1 month ago by Dallyn Pavey
5.0 out of 5 stars
Match Made in Heaven
When I bought my Canon EOS 7D in 2009, I knew I didn't want a kit lens. This was my first choice lens for my DSLR. Read more
Published 1 month ago by K. Fuhrman
5.0 out of 5 stars
My top lens
This is my primary lens because it does great in low lite and has pretty good range. I would buy this lens again in a heartbeat. Worth every penny.
Published 2 months ago by Skippy @ Ole Miss
5.0 out of 5 stars
perfect for my needs!
if you have a crop sensor camera with the kit lens and wanna take your photo skills to the next level, this is the lens for you! all my friends and family think so of all my pics!!
Published 2 months ago by maed
5.0 out of 5 stars
Great lens
Purchased for my 60D to replace the 17-85 kit lens. The lens is little bulky and heavy but great captures images and is perfect for indoor shooting.
Published 2 months ago by Robert Kamino
5.0 out of 5 stars
The Magnificent 2.8 Wide Zoom
One of the best wide zoom lenses available. With a high price of course but there is a good reason. This is an L-series quality lens, it shares the L-series UD lens elements (L is... Read more
Published 2 months ago by Ed Arias
5.0 out of 5 stars
The best of the Best
In the past, I bought a lot of lenses (Canon - Sigma - Tamron) with different focal length. I returned some or sold the other after using them for a while cause I didn't like them. Read more
Published 2 months ago by Raid
5.0 out of 5 stars
Canon lenses are great
Not a professional photographer but appreciate quality and this lens is no exception to canon's reputation for great lenses. Read more
Published 3 months ago by Double-E
5.0 out of 5 stars
Great walk around lens
I replaced a Tamron 24-135 lens with this one. I miss the zoom a bit, but this focuses so much faster and takes so much better pictures, that I don't miss it too much.
Published 3 months ago by Matt Person
