canon 17-85 advice

Bob

Bob

Messages
1,037
Name
Faithless
Edit My Images
No
Would this make a good walk about lens for holidays etc?
Bob
 
Do you have or are you buying :shrug:

I would have thought so, as on a cropped sensor it's a reasonable spread, not too heavy and IS aswell. (y)
 
It's a good walkabout, however at the long end it's quite slow.

In my opinion, the Sigma 17-70 smokes it. Faster, lighter, smaller and with better macro abilities.

Cheers,
James
 
Thinking of buying but depends on prices cant afford new thats for sure
Bob
 
I really like this lens a lot, and think it's much under-appreciated these days. Sure, I'd prefer the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS, but that's a lot more expensive. I think if you were comparing the 18-55mm kit lens, the 17-85mm and the 17-55mm then they're all great lenses for the price. Just depends on your budget.

I'm a little surprised to read the Sigma 17-70 as better, but I wouldn't know - I had a bad experience with Sigma and won't touch them.

Stroller.
 
Don't touch it with a borrowed barge pole!!

You would be better off with the regular original 18-55 kit lens...no frills, no pretense and very reasonable results if you get a good copy.

The 17-85 distorts horribly at the long and short end...especially at the short end.

It is reasonably sharp (when not wide open) with satisfactory colour rendition but utterly useless for portraiture of justabout any type...same for architecture.

As a lightweight walkabout lens for landscapes while hiking it could do but that is about it.

I suppose it really depends how critical you are of your photography and yes, budget is a factor I'm surebut, be warned...approach this lens with caution.
 
I had one, didn't much like it.

As soon as I got a siggy 10-20 and a nifty fifty I pretty much never used it again. The IS was handy, but I expect that the faster siggy will be more useful all round. Admittedly I might be doing different things to you and did miss the longer reach from time to time (but not enough to put the 17-85 on the body :) )

I'd stay well clear if I were you.
 
I've got one and use it a fair bit.

Alternatives from Sigma and Tamrom in the same price have F2.8 so it may be worth going for those.

They'll have their own downsides though primarily AF related.

sid

edit/ I've got the canon and the sigma but personally I'd get the tamron.
 
I was looking for one of these a few weeks ago along with the f2.8 offerings from Sigma/Tamron (thread here).

In the end I went for a Sigma 18-50 f2.8 as the majority of recommendations were for the sigma/tamron and I'd read some worrying things about the 17-85IS, so far I'm very happy with it!
 
I kept reading good reviews and bad on most lens that have been talked about so I have bitten the bullet and bought a used canon 17-85 from a member on here so just waiting for it to arrive and see how good or bad it is Thanks to all for your advice
Bob
 
I had a 17-85 and liked it a lot. Great walkabout range, IS, light and reasonably compact. Sharp too, but prone to CA, distortion and vignetting. But if you shoot Raw and run them through the lens aberration correction suite in Canon's free DPP software, that is all sorted to a higher standard than any other similar lens.

I often wonder why I swappped it for a 17-55 2.8.
 
Thanks for that advice hoppyuk Never shot in raw so this may make me start too
Bob
 
Bob said:
Thanks for that advice hoppyuk Never shot in raw so this may make me start too
Bob
Click to expand...

:)

I think the unique stuff you can do in DPP is great. It will all be done in-camera in the next generation of DSLRs. And if you do shoot Raw, it forces you to do a little PP which is good experience.

It's amazing how just a little custom tweaking in Raw can really lift some images and I have also spent some time adjusting my Picture Styles. These settings are tagged to the Raw file and nine times out of ten I'm very happy with them, and that cuts out a lot of preliminary fiddling. But of course, you can override these basic settings before saving. It just gives you a head start.

I'm not sure which version of DPP you got with your camera, but not all versions support the full range of lenses. Versions from v3.5 onwards has them all. You can download the latest upgrade from the Canon site.
 
Had one, didnt like it, prefer the results from the Sigma 17-70, and find the lens lighter too.
Another thing about lenses i dont like is the variable aperture through a zoom range, and both these lenses suffer the same problem.
I like my Sigma 24-70 f2.8 alot (Now that i got i back from Sigma, nice and sharp), and i want to invest in the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 if i dont upgrade my 40d to a FF or 1.3x crop camera. These lenses will serve someone better, and you can probably get both used for not much more then the 17-85is
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top