about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
216 537675 Jun 1, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
87% of reviewers $1,019.18
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
7.89
7.41
9.1
l217_efs1755

Specifications:
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.

Focal Length & Maximum Aperture: 17-55mm 1:2.8
Lens Construction: 19 elements in 12 groups
Diagonal Angle of View: 7830' - 2750'
Focus Adjustment: AF with full-time manual
Closest Focusing Distance: 1.15 ft. / 0.35m
Zoom System: 5-group helical zoom (front group moves: 27mm)
Filter Size: 77mm
Max. Diameter x Length, Weight: 3.3 in. x 4.4 in., 22.8 oz. / 83.5mm x 110.6mm, 645g (lens only)


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next
      
jayceooi
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 23, 2007
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 14
Review Date: Oct 3, 2008 Recommend? | Price paid: $854.00

Pros: Fast, sharp, f/2.8, no dust
Cons:
no hood

After using this lens for one year. No dust issue found. I am happy with this lens on my 400D. It is a recommended lens for 1.6x crop body.

Check out my wedding shot with this lens
wedding photo samples


Oct 3, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add jayceooi to your Buddy List  
eunaja
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 22, 2008
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 23, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Fast, Sharp. 2.8
Cons:
Expensive, not an L lens and no hood

Lens is very good for an EFS Lens and it is absolutely a fast lens with 2.8 and it has an IS where in some condition it will help you take a very sharp images. Highly recommended

Aug 23, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add eunaja to your Buddy List  
mique
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 6, 2008
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 17
Review Date: Aug 6, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Range - Very sharp - Fast - IS is OK
Cons:
Bad, really bad build quality for the price (this glass deserves better housing), Dust sucker

Bought this lens in Bangkok after two days deciding between 17-55 and 17-40 4L while drinking good old Singha Wink
2.8 and IS convinced me, although 17-40 is soooo much better built.
My sample is quite sharp, but after only two days of using the lens I saw dust on front elements.
I think I'll just clean the lens myself and put b+w mrc UV filter as I'm almost 100% sure that dust is coming in where the screws are...


Aug 6, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add mique to your Buddy List  
klosz007
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 5, 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 5, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Very high IQ - very sharp, little or no CA; very fast
Cons:
Large, heavy and pricey. For this price I would expect at least lens hood included and higher build quality. Flaring when shooting against the sun.

I've got this lens for some time. I've bought it as as replacement for 40D kit 17-85 IS USM (now is only backup walkround lens).

Although this lens is large and heavy, it is worth having it in your photo bag. Image quality is simply superb - pictures are very sharp, have little or no chromatic aberration, also very little distortion, even at wide angle end (these faults were common for 17-85 at wide end). Simply L lens in terms in IQ.
Also very fast lens (when compared to 17-85) - constant f/2.8 across all focal lengths.
Weak point - susceptible to flaring then shooting agains the sun. At least more flaring than in 17-85.

Build quality is good but not as high as with L lenses. Made of plastic, no weather sealing. We might expect more in this area as this lens is more expensive than some L lenses ! (e.g. 17-40 or 24-105) However Canon saves L marking for EF lenses and since it is EF-S, Canon probably purposely gave it more "classic" build quality.

Strongly recommended walkround EF-S lens for everybody that can afford buying it !


Aug 5, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add klosz007 to your Buddy List  
slamdesign
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 30, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 30, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: IS, 2.8 throughout all zoom range
Cons:
price, not quite as well built as L, no hood.

I bought this to replace my 17-40 F4 L, the main reason was for my low light wedding work.

I intially got sucked into the 'gotta have L lenses', but the proof really is in the pudding so to speak. This lens kicks the 17-40 L in the arse! Its more money yes, but image quality is superb (i have test shots with both lenses if you want to see, email me). F2.8 which I dont think is that fast, creates nice creamy background, which 17-40 isnt great at at all, also has greater zoom range and the bonus IS. I wasnt sure about IS but having used it, its fantastic. Cant really demonstrate it working, but switch it on the head down to 8th or 15th sec and it just works, dont as me how, it just does.

Works that well infact that i will be upgrading my 135 F2L (best lens i ever owned) to a 70-200 f2.8 IS very soon.

Downside, not as smooth as L series with focus rings and build quality, but you soon forget about that when you see the pics it produces.

I hope this helps someone out in their decision, alot of money but buy one asap.


Jul 30, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add slamdesign to your Buddy List  
Access
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 6, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1507
Review Date: Jul 28, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: image quality, reasonably light for a f/2.8, fast, quiet focus
Cons:
IS isn't really needed, cost

Pictures taken with this lens look very good. No major complaints. For general shooting, the IS seems useless but still adds to the cost and weight.

Jul 28, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Access to your Buddy List  
mredden
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 8, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 11
Review Date: Jul 16, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $925.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Useful in so many situations On my camera most of the time
Cons:
Almost as heavy as the 70-200L F4

I keep this fantastic lens on my camera 95% of the time only taking it off when I want to go wide (10-22 EFS), long (70-200L) or light (50 1.8).
Covers most shooting situations . While the IS is a big bonus but it is the IQ is what makes me keep this lens on my camera most of the time.
Never regretted buying this lens which is the truest test of all.


Jul 16, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mredden to your Buddy List  
mmari
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 20, 2008
Location: Singapore
Posts: 21
Review Date: Jul 11, 2008 Recommend? | Price paid: $950.00

Pros: good normal zoom range, IQ, 2.8, IS, USM
Cons:
price, weight, hood not included

almost perfect fast normal zoom for my 40D.

heaviest on its league.

many times that 2.8 & IS save the day, i mean night.

i'm inlove with this lens since i got it from day 1, this is my 2nd longest running lens after 50/1.8 which seldomly seen in action.


Jul 11, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mmari to your Buddy List  
oncoming
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 3, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 18
Review Date: Jul 11, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $930.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Near perfect zoom range, Silent focus/IS
Cons:
No distance markings, No IS with tripod mode, Overpriced

A great lens for closeup event work and portraiture.
Nice zoom and low aperture, although slightly lacking in build for the asking price. My zoom ring sticks(is not smooth) going from 28 to 17 [hopefully something that resolves with time and usage].

Would have liked to see more weather-proofing or a 2.5/2.2 max aperture at this price. Overall I am still very pleased with my 17-55.


Jul 11, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add oncoming to your Buddy List  
Dan Pick
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 29, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 28
Review Date: Jul 10, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $960.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Amazing image quality. Very sharp wide open. IS is da' bomb. Very good color. Quiet, accurate focusing.
Cons:
None I really care about.

I finally decided that I needed new glass more than I needed to upgrade to my 20D. My first purchase--after much thought and research--has been the 17-55 IS. It has not disappointed. The sharpness is amazing. Also, there is simply no better lowlight zoom lens on the market. I love to shoot with natural light whenever possible, and this lens makes it much more possible than when using my older 18-50 2.8 Sigma.

Excellent lens.


Jul 10, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Dan Pick to your Buddy List  
sadghost
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 28, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 154
Review Date: May 26, 2008 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros:
Cons:

Update*
Also The Image stabilization actualy degrades the images on both copys of this lens.And The IS also increses the CA that this lens produces do to lens elememts movement when IS


May 26, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add sadghost to your Buddy List  
historism
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 18, 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 0
Review Date: May 19, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: ultra sharp, fully correctable CA, very low distortion
Cons:
dust sucker, size, doesn't fit my Nodal Ninja 3

I use this lens as my main lens. I mainly shoot architecture where I use it at 17mm.

I love this lens for it's superb sharpness even in the corners. If you need a standard zoom I think there is no better alternative.

At 17mm there is some colour aberration. But when you shoot RAW and apply a correction of -25 in Adobe Camera Raw you won't see any left. Contre jour performance is good too. Both the Tokina 12-24 and the TS-E 24 have worse performance regarding CA.

After two years now you see dust particles behind the front lens. However I couldn't find an influence on image quality probably because the front lens is very big. I assume the dust enters where the zoom moves in and out.

It would be a good lens for making panoramics. Therefore it's sad this lens doesn't fit Nodal Ninja 3 because the nodal point is too far away from the sensor. Have fun with Nodal Ninja 5 or any bigger nodal adapter.


May 19, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add historism to your Buddy List  
sadghost
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 28, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 154
Review Date: May 17, 2008 Recommend? no | Price paid: $1,030.00 | Rating: 6 

Pros: Sharp at 2.8/fast/silent/IS is sweet
Cons:
C-H-R-O-M-A-T-I-C A-B-O-R-A-T-I-O-N...You hsve been warned

This lens is a good lens has good features such as IS/F2.8/Fast Focus/17 mm wide is good enough for alot of situations.

But the killer for me is that F#@%ing CHROMATIC ABORATION ..jesus christ I wish this lens wasn't so bad with it !!

I also have a $300 TOKINA 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5 that I wanted this lens to replace.My TOKINA creates almost no chromatic aberation, by almost I mean it creates at least 90 percent less Chromatic ABORATION then the canon 17-55 at over $1,000 why ?

I have no other lens in my bag that produce that much Chromatic A. I'ved had those other lens for over 5 years, so I was used to not having to deal with them...but now finding workarounds to remove those CA is impacting my worflow and speed way too much.

I will mostlikly return or call canon on monday and ask if they could fix that problem if not... I'm getting my money back to get something else.

So other then that the Chromatic Aberation and oh..also flares like hell..this lens would be perfect!!
And about this dust issue ..Not a problem for me at all.Eevn if this lens had no CA problem..the Dust problem would not be a problem for me.


May 17, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add sadghost to your Buddy List  
Ulan
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 14, 2008
Location: Belgium
Posts: 138
Review Date: May 14, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: very sharp, fast, very good IS and AF
Cons:
expensive (no hood included), moderate build quality

So far, I haven't had dust problems. Optic is very good, no complaint about it, except distortion at lower focal. Didn't experience flare nuisance up to now. IS works well and helps at lower speeds (yes, you gain 3 stops). f2.8 helps you isolate your subject from the background while quality is very good at the centre (and good at the edges). Really harp pictures at closed apertures (f5.6). AF is fast and accurate.

Build quality is not up to the price, it could have been a L construction even if it meant a little more weight. And you have to pay an extra money for a hood (which, by the way, is not very resistant, mine split too easily in two in one of my luggages...).


May 14, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Ulan to your Buddy List  
drongo92
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 19, 2007
Location: Belgium
Posts: 0
Review Date: May 10, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: 2.8, IS, light, sharp even wide open
Cons:
noisy IS

No dust so far. Noisy IS imo. Overpriced.

May 10, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add drongo92 to your Buddy List  
FatBoyAl
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 670
Review Date: May 10, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $950.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: IQ, IS, good focal range, fast AF
Cons:
build, hood

I know this lens is loved by many, but I just can't get past the cheapo build. People will debate that - they have! - but I don't think it's debateable. It's priced like an L, but not built like one.

If Canon doesn't want to include EF-S lenses in the L family, I've no problem with that. Just build them like they are L's, then. Don't put a red ring on it.

It's a great lens for range, for IQ and IS and has fast, accurate AF. I enjoy what I get out of it. Short of going to fast L primes (like a 35 and/or 50), there's no competition within the Canon lineup. Not with a 2.8 and IS.

While I'd recommend it and I'll most likely keep using it, I just can't get over the fact that it's nearly $1000 and plastic. Boggles my mind.


May 10, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add FatBoyAl to your Buddy List  




Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
216 537675 Jun 1, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
87% of reviewers $1,019.18
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
7.89
7.41
9.1
l217_efs1755


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next