Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

I use this lens and I love it to bits, though it has a known issue that it can fail because of a cable inside but I guess that can happen with any lens :shrug: it relatively sharp and I use it a load, lots of photo's on my flickr taken with it :thumbs:

Matt
MWHCVT
 
I had one and I thought that the range, IS and USM were all great. There's some CA but that didn't bother me too much, but there is too much distortion at the wide end and that did bother me. I'm sure I read in one review that this lens distorted more than any similar lens they'd ever tested and I believe them. So, all in all I thought that it had pretty average optics giving ho-hum results but with good range, IS and USM but too much distortion at the wide end for me and mine went and made way for a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8.

If you can live with the (INVHO minor CA issue) and the more serious (IMVHO) distortion at the wide end issue then I suppose it's an averagely good lens with a decent spec. The build isn't fantastic though, IMVHO.
 
I would seriously recommend the 15-85 rather than the 17-85 if you can afford it.

It is wider, faster, sharper and has a better IS system. Yes it's more expensive too...
 
You could also take a look at the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and Sigma 18-50mm f2.8.
 
I was in the same situation as you a few years ago. I wanted something with more reach, and i bought the 17-85. I loved the lens, it was awesome. Fast focusing, great IS and a nice range to use. I only got rid as i wanted more of a travel lens and bought the Canon 18-200, otherwise i would have kept it.

The 15-85 is wider, some say sharper, but its over double the cost! I would go for the 17-85 for now and see how you go. You can always sell it on if you are not happy with it.
 
Go for the 15-85 as there's no doubt it is sharper! It's as sharp as 24-105. Save up and get a 15-85.
 
MWHCVT said:
I'd be interested to know of the people saying not to go for the 17-85 how many have used the lens?? :D

I know that some of the posters above have used it so fair comment on there parts :thumbs:
Click to expand...

I have - my dad has one, distortion is horrible at 17mm and sharpness on edges is pretty horrible too.... I've used the 15-85 and its a whole lot better.

My dad regrets buying it.... didn't know much bout lenses when he got it though.

having said that for £200 and under used its not a bad buy - the market is flooded with used 17-85's!
 
Image quality may depend on the age of the 17/85 you are buying.

Had one from many years ago and it was great beyond 35mm - I have some lovely portraits of the kids at 85mm f5.6 - highly commended at the annual photo club comp.

Recently picked one up that had been part of a 50D kit, tested it against my old one and found much better edges at the wide end and improved sharpness throughtout the range. May be the old one had gone a bit sloppy with time, but I suspect that Canon have improved qc as newer lenses seem to be better than oldies. THe distortion and ca at 17mm is as bad as ever, but only important on a few shots and easily corrected in DPP.

You can get them very cheaply £150-180, all you've got to do is to buy as recent a one as possible. I love mine, it's a great walkabout lens and brill value for money - the 15/85 still approx 3 x the price and only really better at the wide end - testers find the 15/85 worse at the long end! If you are printing at A4 size you'll not see any problems at the wide end.

Highly recommend a 'good' 17/85 - does need cherry picking, but don't ALL lenses if you pixel peep on a 24 inch or bigger HD monitor - for normal size prints I would't hesitate. For giant prints you should contemplate a FF.
 
I've the 17-85 lens and find it great as a walk about lens. I get very good shots and they're sharp with good colours.

Yes the 15-85 maybe better, but then it's more expensive, the 17-55 is probably better still, but it's even more expensive.

For the cost of the 17-85 I think it's a good lens
 
I "upgraded" to the 17-85 from the kit 18-55 IS but I'm still a newbie in photography but have noticed it being sharper than the kit len.

Good walkabout len.

I thought about the 15-85 but at £500, the 17-85 was better VFM imo
 
LikeBreathing said:
Not trying to add to the confusion but also take a look the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC OS Macro HSM. It's more expensive than the 17-85, but cheaper than the 15-85. :D
Click to expand...

Not half as good !
 
LikeBreathing said:
Why's that?
Click to expand...

Probably because of quality control issues - Sigma can be plagued by these, a 17/70 I tested was soft down one side at 17mm - really soft, not just the few mm's you might see on a poor 17/85mm at 17mm.

Why I'd never buy a Sigma zoom without a current UK warranty - their macros are a lot better.
 
Hmmm. So one lens tested and Siggy can be plagued with quality control issues? There's nothing like taking a balanced view is there :lol:
 
travellingcello said:
If you are strapped for cash go for Tamron 17-50 2.8 non-VC - I wouldn't get the 17-85.
Click to expand...

I would second this advice, sort of...

I had a 17-85 and replaced it with a Tamron 17-50 (non-VC). The 17-85 had a nice zoom range but I found the distortion a bit intolerable. I ultimately traded the Tamron 17-50 and 17-85 for a EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM. The latter is *the* lens to own on Canon crop IMO. It's great. The perfect walk-about, fast, sharp and altogether lovely.

In summary, sell a kidney and buy the EF-S 17-55, you'll end up there in the end anyway.
 
I've got a 17-85 and find it very nice indeed. I've got some (IMO) fantastic portraits of my 1 year old niece....I did use a flashgun with it however, but the results are nonetheless very nice indeed. I'm tempted too with the 15-85 or even the 17-55 Canon's but they're a lot more money, so am happy with my 17-85. Even when pixel peeping at 100% view, my images are still sharp. :) (to my eyes at least, before I get shot down in flames :D)
 
I think you should just be aware though that when you inevitably get the urge to upgrade to something else ( kit addiction) the 17-85 is going to be quite hard to get rid of!
 
I got the 17-85mm as a kit lens with the 30D, meaning to sell it and buy something better, but ended up keeping it.

Pros: Excellent walk about range, good sharpness in the centre, and very reasonable IQ, cheap - if you buy used and shop around.
Cons: Build quality isn't bad, but not great either. Slow, serious distortion below about 24mm (correctable in post processing), some copies have edge sharpness and CA issues. Mine is quite acceptable, so this seems to vary.

Ultimately, it depends what you compare it with, and how much you're prepared to spend. The 15-85mm is a better choice, and the 17-55mm is a far better choice (if you can live with the reduced range), but both are significantly more expensive. I suppose you get what you pay for, but the 17-85mm isn't too shabby and it's not the dog it's often made out to be. Just be aware that these are all EFS lenses so they don't come with lens hoods, unless a previous owner bought one. They're pricey, for what they are.
 
Manc Man said:
just purchased 17 x 85 with lens hood from MPB photographic.
under £210.00 delivered.
thank you all again for the advice.
Click to expand...

Excellent. Let is know how you get on with it :-)
 
Didnt you say you were getting it mostly for landscapes Manc Man?

I'd say its a good cheap option in that reguard with the range, IS and the ability to use filters. I'd pickup a decent polarizer right away aswell, potentially a much more noticbley upgrade than the lens itself.
 
Moreorless said:
Didnt you say you were getting it mostly for landscapes Manc Man?

I'd say its a good cheap option in that reguard with the range, IS and the ability to use filters. I'd pickup a decent polarizer right away aswell, potentially a much more noticbley upgrade than the lens itself.
Click to expand...

For landscapes and as a walkabout lens, should get it in the morning and if all goes well I should be working a 2 mins away from Lake Windermere next week. I have some cokin nd filters just need to get an adaptor ring.
 
Manc Man said:
will do Andy..... just hope i haven't made a mistake buying SH
Click to expand...

Wouldn't have thought so and I presume you got a warranty with MPB anyway, so if there is any issues with the lens you have a fall back
 
vaizki said:
I would seriously recommend the 15-85 rather than the 17-85 if you can afford it.

It is wider, faster, sharper and has a better IS system. Yes it's more expensive too...
Click to expand...

Agreed all points.

If it is within your budget the 15-85 is rather good.
 
Hi,

it is semi-decent, but there is a reason SO many appear for sale, people want better soon after owning it :thumbs:

Mike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top