Help me decide on new lens

[frank]

I currently have a Canon 40D, Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS lens that came with camera, Canon 100-400L and Canon 50mm 1.8 lenses I wont bore you with the lee nd grads and other accessories. In the next couple of months I will be in the position to treat myself to a new lens due to retirement and a nice lump sum, wife has given me her blessing to go ahead. Looks like Ian Kerso will be getting another call

I have been looking at maybe changing the kit lens (17-85 IS) to a Canon EF-S 17 - 55 mm F2.8 IS lens, it seems everywhere I look it gets a really good write up for sharpness, quality etc. I am not a pro nor do I do weddings etc, purely a enjoyable past time for me. My main area of photography is really landscapes and wildlife hence the 100-400 L.

Would the 17-55mm lens be a good choice for landscapes and maybe even using as a walkaround lens. The 2.8 is also atttractive to me for indoor stuff, many a time have I missed a cracker of a shot of my toddler grandaughter because of light conditions and not having the nifty fifty on the camera.

Have seen some reports on dust getting sucked into the 17-55 via the front of the lens, anyone had major problems with this and would a good quality filter solve the problem? I've never had any dust problems with my 100-400 L and wonder if the 17-55 dust problem is down to some folk not keeping your gear clean.

If I go for the 17-55mm will I find the 17-85 probably looking to find a new home or possibly staying at home on the shelf unused?

I'm not really interested in going FF tbh as I'm quite happy with my lot so far and hope it all lasts me well into my retirement.

 

[HoppyUK]

17-55 2.8 is fantastic. Don't worry about the dust, it's really not a problem unless you're paranoid, and it's no worse than your 17-85 and 100-400L which also have a reputaion as dust pumps.

I've had all three and it never bothered me, plus it's an easy job to clean the lens yourself if you have the confidence - it takes no more than half an hour with one screwdriver. I've done it; tutorials if you google. Not sure if a filter helps - some say it does, but the lens has got to suck air in somewhere.

Get the 17-55 and you'll never touch the 17-85 again, but it's not that wide for landscape. How is your 17-85 for that? It will obviously be the same. So maybe sell that and get the equally wonderful 10-22 for landscape, plus a nice Hoya HD polarising filter to go with it.

BTW, if you shoot Raw and run the files through the lens aberrations corrections suite in DPP (your free Canon software) it really transforms the 17-85's optical performance. So you could perhaps keep that for now and just get the 10-22 and polariser, and get stuck into some landscape. (Brush up on HDR technqiue too, great for landscape and dramatic skies.)

From what you've said, I think you really need those two new lenses

 

[malla1962]

The 17-55 will do a good job for you.