Canon 17-55mm - Build Quality

[jnO]

My father is most likely buying one of these. He loves the IQ but was concerned that it may not be robust enough.
Whilst he doesn't abuse his equipment he does seem to collect scratches on the bodies and hoods of his 50mm and kit lens.

He tends to do alot of urban photography in London and abroad as well as light climbing and trekking, he tends to not put the camera away and handholds rather than use a strap to keep it out of harms way.
The build quality of an L would be preferrable but his ideal focal range on a crop sensor is not available with IS and f/2.8 on an L.

Is the 17-55mm up to above average use :shrug:

 

[grumpybadger]

I reckon it'll be fine. If he collects scratches on the bodies and hoods on his 50 and kit lens, then he'll also collect scratches on the 17-55. But, so what? Doesn't stop it working...

 

[jnO]

I reckon it'll be fine. If he collects scratches on the bodies and hoods on his 50 and kit lens, then he'll also collect scratches on the 17-55. But, so what? Doesn't stop it working...

I guess his concern is born out of the lens being nearly ten times the price of the 50. He's more likely to shrug off breaking a £75 lens.
Probably best I just tell him to beef up his insurance cover on his kit. Or lend it to me on a lengthy basis where it will be perfectly cared for

 

[cymruchris]

Or cover it in cling film

You're right - it's not L series build - but it's still a cracking lens.. I'm sure he'll be very happy with one...

 

[Orville]

My 24-105mm L had soooo much better build quality than my 17-55mm, tut the 17-55mm optics are a little better. It is currently the best walkabout lens you can buy for a crop sensor dslr. This and my 70-200mm F/4 IS are the only two zoom lenses I have tried which are capable of delivering per-pixel resolution on 7D. They come very close to good primes.

 

[jnO]

Or cover it in cling film

You're right - it's not L series build - but it's still a cracking lens.. I'm sure he'll be very happy with one...

Shame you cannot buy Lenscoats for it

 

[vectraturbo]

build quality is excellent on these...not L quality...but then I have seen brand new L's full of dust and fungus!!!

 

[Hongsta299]

The build of the 17-55 is not as good as the 24-105 but it's no slouch either. It's plasticky but also quite solid, it certainly does not feel like it's going to fall to pieces at any point.
I think if you get in any situation that would get your 17-55 scratched then the 24-105 will suffer the same fate, it's not like it's got a scratch resistant coating or anything. The only benefits of the L is a more solid feel, weather resistance and more dampened zoom/focus rings and that's about it build wise

 

[robbys82]

I've got one which has taken a lot of abuse - use it for weddings, have taken it on ski holdays and it even slid down the slope in a bag (thats another story)

I've taken some amazing photos using it. It doesn't have any dust or anything like that it it although I did have a problem this year with the zoom sticking. Sent it off to canon and they've repaired it along with a full service. I'm pretty sure this is just wear and tear due to the amount of use its had but was a bit gutted.

If it were L build quality everyone would have one! Mines still mark free despite lots of use.

I'm considering moving to a 24-70 if I go FF. If that lens is as good as my 17-55 I'll be stoked,

 

[Orville]

I'm considering moving to a 24-70 if I go FF. If that lens is as good as my 17-55 I'll be stoked,

Both lenses are supposed to offer extremely similar IQ (top of the class). However, you can club an elephant to death with the 24-70 and still use it afterwards.

 

[cymruchris]

However, you can club an elephant to death with the 24-70 and still use it afterwards.

I'd like to see you try Something tells me the elephant would end up with a mild headache - and you'd be 2'4"!!

 

[jnO]

The build of the 17-55 is not as good as the 24-105 but it's no slouch either. It's plasticky but also quite solid, it certainly does not feel like it's going to fall to pieces at any point.
I think if you get in any situation that would get your 17-55 scratched then the 24-105 will suffer the same fate, it's not like it's got a scratch resistant coating or anything. The only benefits of the L is a more solid feel, weather resistance and more dampened zoom/focus rings and that's about it build wise

The scratches highlight how he treats his lenses more than anything. I think he is basing the build of the 17-55 on his 50mm and kit lens :bang:

I've got one which has taken a lot of abuse - use it for weddings, have taken it on ski holdays and it even slid down the slope in a bag (thats another story)

I've taken some amazing photos using it. It doesn't have any dust or anything like that it it although I did have a problem this year with the zoom sticking. Sent it off to canon and they've repaired it along with a full service. I'm pretty sure this is just wear and tear due to the amount of use its had but was a bit gutted.

If it were L build quality everyone would have one! Mines still mark free despite lots of use.

I'm considering moving to a 24-70 if I go FF. If that lens is as good as my 17-55 I'll be stoked,

That's good to hear, thanks

Both lenses are supposed to offer extremely similar IQ (top of the class). However, you can club an elephant to death with the 24-70 and still use it afterwards.

I'll bear that in mind, incase I ever feel the need to club a mammal to death I'll hesitate before reaching for the 17-55

 

[philthejuggler]

Not got IS or as much reach but I love my 16-35L as a crop walkaround. Add a 50 prime and you can cover the ground!

Phil