about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
251 573474 Apr 12, 2013
Recommended By Average Price
80% of reviewers $569.41
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
7.70
6.70
7.6
EF17-85

Specifications:
• Focal Length & Maximum Aperture: 17 - 85mm; 1:4-5.6
• Lens Construction: 17 elements in 12 groups
• Diagonal Angle of View: 78° 30' - 18° 25'
• Focus Adjustment: Inner focusing system, with focusing cam
• Closest Focusing Distance: 0.35m - 1.15 ft.
• Zoom System: Ring USM
• Filter Size: 67mm
• Max. Diameter x Length, Weight: 3.1" x 3.6", 16.8 oz. / 78.5 x 92mm, 475g


 


Page:  10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16  next
          
bkriete
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 20, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 396
Review Date: Oct 8, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $400.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: IS is extraordinary, useful range, good build, I like USM, effective "poor man's macro"
Cons:
Optical quality is only OK, very prone to flare even with hood

I purchased this on the FM a few weeks ago and couldn't wait to test out the IS. Not expecting miracles, I was blown away. It does a fantastic job of stabilizing the lens at shutter speeds much lower than I would have thought reasonable. 3 extra stops is pretty easy for me, and if I am braced against a wall or chair 4 or 5 seem attainable.
I was disapointed by the picture quality outside. For some reason this lens seems more vulnerable to flare than even the 10-22 EF-S. Indoors it is much better, and the IS seems to compensate nicely for the relatively slow aperture. I think this lens will be a great "museum" lens, giving me decent depth of field and fairly sharp pictures in low-light.
I have been very pleased with this lens for closeups of the (finally starting to change) autumn foliage, flowers, etc. I think - though this may be just my perception - that the optical quality is higher with closeups than it is with infinity or mid-range focus. USM focusing is also nice, though I notice at 85 mm (5.6 is the max aperture) that it seems to have a little trouble focusing on low-contrast subjects indoors. It's still comparable in focus ability to my 50/1.8 under these conditions, and better at shorter focal lengths where it is at f/4 or so.
I have used this lens for some impromptu portraits and the bokeh is nicer than I would have expected at 5.6 when the subject is relatively much closer than the background.
Overall, it's a versatile lens, with acceptable optical quality, made pleasant to use by the USM and IS.


Oct 8, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add bkriete to your Buddy List  
framilo
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 7, 2005
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
Review Date: Oct 7, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: USM, Stabilizzatore IS, buona escursione, leggero.
Cons:
Molle a 17mm.

Ottimo obiettivo tuttofare, preciso nell'AF; ottimo lo stabilizzatore che permette un guadagno netto di 3 stop; Qualitΰ costante su tutta la lente.
Io avevo un Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 EX DC, che ho sostituito con il 17-85 per i seguenti motivi:
1) aveva problemi con l'AF;
2) la qualitΰ della lente non era costante ma aveva problemi nel lato destro;
3) alterava i colori delle foto tendendo verso il giallo.
Con il 17-85 mi trovo molto bene, un p'ς morbido a 17mm, i colori sono neutri e l'AF θ sempre preciso.
Con lo tsabilizzatore attivato faccio foto in interni a iso inferiori rispetto al sigma 18-50 f/2.8, IS eccellente.


Oct 7, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add framilo to your Buddy List  
eyeu
Online
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 96
Review Date: Oct 5, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $550.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Great walk about lens...crisp images..IS really helps and works!..
Cons:
a bit pricey...

I not only paid the going price, but bought it at a camera store!! Oh, my...
I really use this lens most of the time. Find the range is very handy and the images have been very very good. An excellent addition to my 20D and glad I bought it.


Oct 5, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add eyeu to your Buddy List  
dhphoto
Online
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 15, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 9943
Review Date: Sep 13, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: $200.00 | Rating: 3 

 
Pros: Quite sharp and medium and long zooms
Cons:
Woeful at 17mm

I got this lens stupidly cheap, a deal that was too good to miss, although I'll be selling it shortly.

I wanted something a bit wider than my 24-85 Canon and thought this might be it. I was wrong, it is WAY overpriced and awful at the wide end. at 50-85 it isn't bad - not in the same street as my 24-70L and about the same as the 24-85 it was supposed to replace.

It is so big considering it is SO slow (85mm f 5.6, my large format lenses were faster than that) OK, it's got IS, so what.

A very ordinary, very overpriced optic.


Sep 13, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews View gallery Add dhphoto to your Buddy List  
alex0206
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 12, 2005
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 12, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: all god
Cons:
mild ca - price



Sep 12, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add alex0206 to your Buddy List  
VRLR
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 7, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 109
Review Date: Sep 7, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $600.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: good build quality useful focal length range reasonably sharp
Cons:
slow at f5.6

So I made my switch from my Nikon F3, using primes to digital, and purchased an EOS 20D with the 17-85 lens.

This lens has a useful focal length range, and I don't have any complaints about its sharpness. Yes at 17mm wide open its not tack sharp, but it's good enough for my purposes. I shoot mostly portraits, and here is where I have my problems. I would have liked a little more range, say 100mm, and the f5.6 is crippling in natural light. Yes, IS helps, but your target has to hold 100% still. Background blurr... forget about it at f5.6.

But... for most purposes its a great walk around lens, and does the job well. Build quality isn't L, and it isn't AIS manual Nikon, but it is acceptable. Certainly better that the ridiculous plastic feel of the 18-55 kit lens.

So need a lens that will do 80%+ of what you want. Isn't too heavy, and has a very good focal length range.... then its a hit. But IS is not a trade off for fast f-stop, no matter what the sales guy says.

I'm keeping this lens, and just added a 85 1.8, and a 70-200 F4, and I think I've got what I need. Although I will try out the new 24-105 f4 when it comes out. I know the price is double this lens, but the range is better for me, the 1 f-stop pick up is appealing, and L is still L.


Sep 7, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add VRLR to your Buddy List  
ibilly
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 432
Review Date: Aug 29, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $539.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Extremely sharp, very useful zoom range, circular aperature creates great blur, IS is awesome (3 stops!) great color and contrast, good heft and build quality, both rings provide rewarding tactile feedback
Cons:
Speed means you need that circular aperature, price near that of an L lens, but no weather sealing. A wider aperature would also make the IS all that much better...

I'm upgrading from the stock 18-55, and i couldn't get as poor results with the 17-85 if i smeared vasoline on the front element. This lens is great. It's a little slow, and about $100 too expensive, but other than that (and some occasional flare and purple fringing), this lens is good enough for a pro. A bold statement yes, but for half the price of many L lenses, the 17-85 dleivers 90% the performance. One of the really great things is the zoom itself. It's got two aspherical elements, and ther ange is pretty much perfect. The performancce is very sharp throughout, and the rings are very grippable (but not too grippy) and easy to find. I've been with my new lens for about a week, and it was second nature after day two. Versatile, shapr, IS, etc. It's the perfecct 'all purpose lens', making very few compromises in a feild of other lenses that make far too many.

Aug 29, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ibilly to your Buddy List  
stefimke
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 20, 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 69
Review Date: Aug 26, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $700.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Focal range, fast AF, IS does help
Cons:
Slow F-stop, sticky-zoom, hood not included, expensive

IMHO it's the best walkaround lens available at the moment. It has a descent wideangle @17mm and at least a bit of tele @85mm. The auto-focus is quite fast thanks to the USM motors. The Image Stabilisation really works and helps in a lot of situations, as long as the subjects are static.

The thing that bothers me the most about this lens is the sticky zoom, the zoom-ring is not smooth at all.


Aug 26, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add stefimke to your Buddy List  
alfarmer
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Aug 15, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2050
Review Date: Aug 23, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $599.00 | Rating: 5 

 
Pros: Optical quality at 35mm-70mm, new 3-stop IS, focal range, build quality, size & weight
Cons:
Optical quality at 17mm and 85mm, SLOW lens

This lens should have been the perfect walk-about and vacation lens, especially when you want to carry just one lens with you. It's focal range (17-85) is almost perfect (going to 105 or 135 would be perfect, for me at least). IS

Unfortunately, these positive features are marred by poor optical performance at the ends, and S-L-O-W minimum f/stop. Even the IS won't save you in a museum!

I'd still recommend the lens, however, for casual photographers who aren't concerned with large prints or low-light photography. I really, really liked all of the non-optical parts of the lens!

ALF


Aug 23, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add alfarmer to your Buddy List  
tell
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 25, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 1421
Review Date: Aug 22, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: excellent range, IS works as advertised, sturdy build, great colors/contrast, OK Macro.
Cons:
No hood or case include, not 2.8, expensive.

I agonized over this lens for weeks before purchasing it with the 20D. Some of the reviews had me spooked but I just couldn't find an equivalent lens for the money. I also own a Tamron 28-75 2.8 but was fearing that 28 wouldn't be wide enough for table shots at a Bar Mitzvah I was to shoot. After using it for a week now I can say that I am happy with the purchase. The only real draw back for me is that it's not a 2.8 lens. I would not want to shoot a dark church/no flash wedding solely with this lens. However it worked wonderfully at the reception and dance I shot this past weekend. I used both the Tamron and the 17-85 with bounce flash and I believe the 17-85 focused faster.

Bottom line, if you want the convenience of zoom, IS, and don't have the money for fast L zoom glass, or just want a lens to travel with, then I think the 17-85 is a wise investment.
Tell


Aug 22, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add tell to your Buddy List  
ibizargak
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 19, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3
Review Date: Aug 21, 2005 Recommend? | Price paid: $569.00

 
Pros: Very fast. IS really does work. Massive feel. Images are tack-sharp with the aide of lens-shade. Competes with L series lense, in fact for the price, you can't do better, this lens is on my Rebel at all times. Outstanding zoom range.
Cons:
expensive. CA on fringes.

After a year I have come to know and love this lens. It's solid as a rock. It was me who didn't know how to use it. It is made for the Rebel, in fact other than the 50mm which is a bit sharper, I doubt you'll ever need a normal lens. It's big and heavy, but worth the weight. I wrote a negative review a year ago, I wish I could take that back.

for under 1300 bucks, buddy you can't find a better deal, the Rebel (pawn the standard lens) and this lens (find a broader zoom factor)


I used to shoot with my old Yashica 1:2 and my Nikon 1:2. I know what sharp is and these digital lenses cannot compare. But then again I'm not paying 29 cents a print at Walmart anymore.

This damn zoom lense is outstanding, rugged and seems to have taken all the abuse I could muster so far.

The Canon 17-85 is a great lens. If I had 1 lens and I do, this would be it, and it is.


Steve Bennett


Aug 21, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add ibizargak to your Buddy List  
ddraig
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 30, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 13
Review Date: Aug 6, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Overall - a good "walk around" lens.
Cons:
Kind of soft in the corners. Takes a bit of practice, but it seems worth it.

I might not be the best reviwer for this forum.

I'm (slowly) moving from Canon film to Canon digital. Just a 20D plus this lens. Still playing with it - center seems "OK" in the mid-range - a little soft at the corners. Certainly not the fastest lens in the bag.

At 17-20mm, there is a lot of vinette with mine. I'm not sure if it's the lens in general, or just mine - I'm wondering if I should swap/replace it.

The IS seems to work "OK", but I need to spend a lot more time looking at hendheld vs tripod.

I like this range as a walk-around, and if I can fix the wide end end, I'll (probably) be happy.


Aug 6, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ddraig to your Buddy List  
cmitwac
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 10, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 43
Review Date: Aug 4, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $599.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Good walk around range IS very impressive Sharp at zoom end
Cons:
Very soft at 17 Significant chromatic abberation or fringing with bright background light Corners soft Not bright enough (starting at f/4 and downhill) which I think causes the camera to struggle to focus sometimes



Aug 4, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add cmitwac to your Buddy List  
Chrisxxx
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 20, 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13
Review Date: Aug 3, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 2 

 
Pros: IS, Looks and feels good
Cons:
Soft pictures, unpleasing bokeh, expensive

I really wanted to like this lens, the focal lenght is very useful for 1.6 crop, but I was so dissapointed when I started using it. I like the build of it very much, but all the pictures I took with it just lacked the crispness which I like so much - and get from my other lenses.

I sold mine after a few months, and got a used 24-70L


One could only dream of a crisp and clear 17-85 f/2.8L IS USM...


Aug 3, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Chrisxxx to your Buddy List  
HicSuntLeones
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 3, 2005
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 3, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $680.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Zoom range, handling, sharpness (certain copies)
Cons:
vignetting, CA, sharpness (some copies)

I had two copies - the first one was awesome sharp, but it has problems with focusing at 17-24mm, where it mostly focused to 3-10m instead to infinity. Zooming in, focus and zooming out worked to fix this problem.
My second copy has good focusing but it is not so sharp at the corners. This makes me sad, that it really is a lottery as Canon doesn't have good QA checking and even you pay a lot of money, you aren't sure of what you get (camera bodies are the same issue). I would reccomend this lens becouse of it's potential but you need to have good copy.


Aug 3, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add HicSuntLeones to your Buddy List  
chromedome
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 4, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1
Review Date: Aug 2, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Versatile, great IS, my copy is very sharp even wide open - must be the best compromise lens available - Perfect for the 20D.
Cons:
Some vignetting with normal thickness Polariser, Not L, Not constant aperture, Mild CA fully wide gone by 20mm, some barrel when wide

To be honest I cannot understand the negative reviews of this lens. It's a consumer zoom with a slightly OTT price tag, granted, but it does what it sets out to do and that's fills a gap in the market that no other lens seems to come close to (see synopsis below), and if used to its strengths, it will allow you to produce some very good quality images!

I've had this lens on my camera for about 4 months now and the IS has saved the day for me now on more occasions than I care to mention. I don't think 3 stops is an exaggeration. I find that it is very sharp and detailed from 24 up to 85 performing at its absolute best at or around F7 at about 50mm. This lens has a great range for everyday walk-around shooting - surely what it is designed for! I take it that this is the EF-S replacement for the EF28-135IS as it's only designed for 1.6 crops wich equates to 27-136mm and has an improved IS system.

I have the Tamron 17-35f2.8/4 and when I examine images taken at 17mm by both these lenses from a tripod. I find very little difference. I rarely bother to change from the 17-85 now as I trust it to produce the goods for me and I'm a lot more comfortable with its ability to focus accurately.

I had the Sigma 18-125 for a short period. This lens was quite sweet especially for the price, but for me it was not good enough and very soft and poor to focus at the long end.

I originaly had the Tamron 17-35 paired with the Tamron 28-75F2.8 - I couldn't get any of three copies of the 28-75 to focus at all unless I used F8. Even after a return for calibration they all Front Focussed terribly, so from my perspective; if you own an EF-S mount and you want a good reliable all rounder then the EF-S17-85IS is probably the best bet at the moment. It's not as sharp and contrasty as a 70-200F4L but then again I'd be dissapointed with the term 'L' if it was! (I haven't tried the Sigma 18-50f2.8 yet though!)






Aug 2, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add chromedome to your Buddy List  

   



Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
251 573474 Apr 12, 2013
Recommended By Average Price
80% of reviewers $569.41
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
7.70
6.70
7.6
EF17-85


Page:  10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16  next