|
|
tonyliau
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 5, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Nov 10, 2009
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, great focal range for a walk-around lens, fast focusing
|
|
Cons:
|
Lack of sharpness, drab photos, slow maximum aperture
|
|
Did not like the softness of this lens on the wide end, and also when aperture was wide open. Stopped down was bearable. IQ was unacceptable for me. I sold mine and got the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 instead and have been MUCH happier - so much so, that I do not miss the lack of IS on my Tamron.
|
|
 Nov 10, 2009
|
|
Asmodeous
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 9, 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 136
|
|
Review Date: Nov 9, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Image stabiliser & light weight.
|
|
Cons:
|
17-24mm range, Chromatic aberations & price.
|
|
This can be a good lens. That is if you ignore the 17 - 24mm zoom range.
In this range the lens exhibits some terrible aspects. Huge amounts of distortions, Chromatic aberations and softening of the corners and then toss in a good dose of Vignetting, at least a stop's worth.
Sounds like a bad lens huh? Well, wind the zoom ring around past the 24mm and suddenly most of these problems go away.
The distortions are gone, the corners are much better and the vignetting is almost unnoticable. There is still a bit of CA, but hey. The lens makes a remarkable transformation.
Imho, this is really a 24-85mm lens. Resist the tempation to venture below 24mm and you have a fine lens. It's light and the IS works a treat. A great walk around lens. If you have a UWA lens such as the 10-22mm EF-s, then this lens makes a great partner. Use the UWA up to 22mm and this lens from there on up.
The price is the big hurdle for this lens. Shops want over $1,000 aus for one which is absurd. But this lens is plentiful and picking up one second hand with little use for around $300-400 aus makes it good buying.
|
|
|
Nov 9, 2009
|
|
vince
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 18, 2002
Location: China
Posts: 304
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2009
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast focusing, reasonably good build quality for a consumer lens, IS.
|
|
Cons:
|
Image quality is average.
|
|
I bought this to replace the 18-55 kit lens before I got the 17-40L. I was a bit puzzled by the results. The cheap fisher-price 18-55 would often deliver sharper results than the 17-85 zoom specially from 18 through 30-35mm or so. I tried the micro adjustment on the 50D but no luck. Thought maybe my lens was a dog, and tried another one at the shop but it came out the same.
The lens is ok from 30-85mm though. Good decent focal length range for general travel, but stop down to f/5.6-6.3 for any sort of decent results. I still haven't been able to get a really sharp image at 17-35/40mm at any aperture.
|
|
|
Sep 28, 2009
|
|
joelypolly
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 29, 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Apr 24, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight and reasonable size, Good range (27~136mm), IS works well, Good starter lens and walk around lens
|
|
Cons:
|
Contrast isn't quite as good, Plastic body, Image quality could be better
|
|
This is your "standard" zoom lens for Canon cropped bodies, the 17-85mm translates to 27~136 on standard 35mm full frame. This gives you reasonably wide angle and not too bad telephoto. The aperture goes from 4 at 17mm to 5.6 at 85mm. The price is around 600AUD/450USD. Everything about this lens is "standard" or just very average. Now this isn't necessarily a bad thing as this is one of the best standard (read:walk around) lenses for cropped bodies.
The lens is light and quite compact which means you won't be too worried about carrying it around with you all day. It is focuses fast enough to catch most types of action if thats your thing. Nothing about this lens stands out about the crowd but nothing about it is particularly bad.
Now lets talk image quality. Well thats average too... Looking at the photo from 30D it looks great when your zoomed out or printed normal size but at the pixel level it isn't very sharp. If we look at image quality towards the edges well that kinda gets a bit worse but still reasonable if your not pixel peeping. Towards the edge we also run into CA issues especially when using a higher aperture number (ie. anything over 16). Other things to be mindful of is the distortion and vignetting at 17mm.
What about macro work? Well this lens is not to bad for that since it can focus quite close at around 30cm. Flowers and insects won't fill the full frame but you will be able to crop a bit and get a reasonable sized bug. So I guess thats another average point in its favor.
You can check out some sample images from http://joelypolly.blogspot.com/2009/04/canon-17-85mm-f4-56-ef-s-usm-review.html
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2009
|
|
saxologist
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 9, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Apr 11, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
fast quiet and nice range and tack sharp for me.
|
|
Cons:
|
less contrast than other lenses
|
|
I have found that flash helps alot, and just got a polarized filter (linear) and this helps the contrast immensley...so can't sell it yet.
|
|
|
Apr 11, 2009
|
|
hypadizysoiboi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 4, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 23
|
|
Review Date: Apr 3, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $460.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Relatively Cheap, Good Standard Zoom, Semi-Sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
Not a lens for anyone serious about photography
|
|
I bought this lens to replace my kit lens on the 400d. Back then, I knew very little about the world of photography and i just wanted a good standard zoom. This did the job. NOTHING MORE.
If I could rewind time, I would get a 17-40L over this. For about 200 dollars more, you get a much richer tone and sharpness as well as a L-quality build.
After using this lens for a while, i realized that i use it as a prime at 17 usually. I've never actually captured any nice images at any magnification past 50mm.
Also, EF-S means its not compatible with the 5d FF-Sensor. If you want to stick with your 1.6 crop, this lens will do, but if you are planning to upgrade to a 5d, get the 17-40.
I recommend this lens to amateur photographers who just want a lens that covers decent range. If you plan on going professional, stick with the L glass, you almost cant go wrong.
|
|
|
Apr 3, 2009
|
|
another_mikey
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 2, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 135
|
|
Review Date: Mar 28, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
IS, handling, range, reasonable IQ for price
|
|
Cons:
|
variable and somewhat slow max aperture, some distortion and CA at 17mm (fixable in PP)
|
|
I have used this lens for a very large number of shots over the almost 3 years I have owned it. It really has never let me down. I have done travel photography with it as my main lens on a trip to Europe, I have done landscape stuff back here in the states with it, as well as people pictures.
Pros:
- The IS is great. It was literally the difference in getting decent shots or not in many dimly lit churches and museums in Europe.
- The 17-85 range on a crop body really is quite excellent for a walk around lens
- For me, the IQ has really been good. Granted, up to now I have not really has any L quality glass to compare it to, but I have take a number of shots I am very happy with with this lens.
- The size and weight are very manageable, and it has a nice balanced feel on my 40D.
Cons:
- some CA and and distortion, mostly at 17mm. I fix it in PP
- Sometimes there is just not enough light (even considering IS), to get the shot with this lens.
Summary:
Are there better lenses than this one out there? Absolutely. But for the money, it is a nice package of range, reasonable if not outright stellar IQ, and price. I think this lens gets somewhat of a bum rap, it can take excellent pictures.
ML
|
|
|
Mar 28, 2009
|
|
jlandaue
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 5, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 439
|
|
Review Date: Mar 4, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Zoom range, fast focus, accurate, not too sharp but not to soft, reliable, Image Stabilization.
|
|
Cons:
|
Some Purple Fringing, some Distortion wide open.
|
|
Zoom Range, Image Stabilization and being reliable is what makes me not to get rid of this lens. This is the lens that I would never sell.
Because of the zoom range, I will take this lens anywhere. Although not too sharp, the IS and accuracy in this lens helps a lot.
I have used this lens outdoors and for travel, as well as for indoors event, parties, babieshowers, etc. Everything informal.
|
|
|
Mar 4, 2009
|
|
st_dimov
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 29, 2005
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 13
|
|
Review Date: Jan 15, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Good range, IS.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nasty purple fringing at the wide end, not sharp at corners, variable aperture is a PITA.
|
|
I decided I do not need the IS in such a short lens and sold it to finance a 17-40L. Quite happy with my choice.
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2009
|
|
hdco1098
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 20, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 9, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Perfect range for a one-lens lens on 1.6x. IS. Relatively light and compact.
|
|
Cons:
|
CA at the edges. Not quite as sharp as the top glass.
|
|
Now that my 17-85 has apparently died, giving me an Error 99 message on my 30D, I had to post in support of this workhorse that has been carried all over the world on a Rebel XT and now 30D. Probably has 10,000 shots on it or so. It has produced some great captures and generally exhibits good quality. In thinking about a replacement I rented a 24-70L but found it too big and heavy for the walkaround use that the 17-85 covered.
This is one of those lenses that you probably will not buy if you read the forums and maybe won't buy if you read the reviews here. It's very difficult not to get caught up in getting the best possible theoretical quality. But if you buy it and get out in the world and use it (particularly it's necessary to travel light) you will likely appreciate the overall good qualities of this lens.
That said, I'm a little disappointed that after those 10K shots I am getting the Error 99. It's not a very high number, really. There is a brief buzzing noise when shooting that probably has to do with stuck aperture blades. With Canon charging a base 110 (I think) fee to fix it, it's a good excuse to try something new and I just got the 17-55.
Still, with the price now down to less than $400, it's a worthwhile choice.
|
|
|
Jan 9, 2009
|
|
oajlu
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 19, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 153
|
|
Review Date: Dec 23, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
ring USM, IS, metal mount
|
|
Cons:
|
blur, ca, and distortion at 17mm, but dpp can fix it. slow speed
|
|
I traded my sigma 17-70 for this lens.
overall, it's a good walkaround lens for outdoor. IQ is not very decent at this price range. Canon can make this lens a little better, and they really should include lens hood on all of canon's lens. however, it has ring USM and IS. they are kind of essential functions to me. So even though its IQ is not as good as 17-70, i dont feel regreted to make this trade.
After all, i dont need this lens to shot moving subject or protrait. i just use it as a walkaround lens for outdoor.
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2008
|
|
PhilO
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Oct 13, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Underrated - a great value for the money
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
I've shot all of the L glass mid-range zooms and COMPARATIVELY speaking this lense is a great value!
No, it not the sharpest but images are quite sharp when properly post processed as all digital images should be.
No, it is not the fastest but is quite fast in good light with proper camera settings.
Yes, it is light and well balanced on the 40D.
Yes, it has a great zoom range for general purpose use.
Yes, it may be the best value walk-around Canon offers.
For these reasons I rate it overall a 10.
Here is a small gallery of sample images:
http://www.pbase.com/pao/1785_images
Hope this helps some buyers.
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2008
|
|
|
