Canon 9517A002 Black Friday Discounts!
 |
Canon 9517A002 Black Friday Discounts!.
Product: Canon 9517A002 Amazon Price: Too low to display Availability: In Stock |
Compare Prices on Canon 9517A002
Then you might mediate getting a copy of the Canon EF 17-85 IS. If you have a Digital Rebel, XT, or 20D and have been shooting with a kit lens, this is one of the lenses that a lot of people consume as their first upgrade. Some people unprejudiced purchase it in situation of the kit lens when they capture the camera body. It's an extremely favorite lens because the range and size are fair upright for taking anywhere. I personally debated getting this lens because I wasn't definite about the quality of the glass and my main trouble was that it wasn't swiftly enough for all occasions. One of the more frustrating things for me about the kit lens, as spacious as it was for such minimal cost, was that the aperture wasn't fixed. I found myself having to bump up the ISO to perform up for the lack of an f-stop or two. For those who are current to photography, that basically means you have to compensate for the fact that the lens can't let enough light into the sensor so you have to do the sensor more sensitive (but also at the cost of lower quality and more grainy results) with the higher ISO setting.
I decided I didn't want to pick that risk and went all out since it was supposed to be my walk-around lens that I'd carry all the time. I picked up the expensive EF 24-70 f/2.8L lens that so many pros exhaust because I opinion it had a decent enough focal length range and at 2.8 it was mercurial enough for all my lightning needs. It cost $1100 and after actually hanging it around my neck, I decided it wasn't going to work for my unusual needs. The lens itself is relatively tremendous and weighs a ton on a 20D. I returned the lens after talking to a friend who is a professional photographer who basically recommended picking up the 17-85 IS. He owned both (among others) and said that it was perfect for walking around because it had both the wide raze and a decent telephoto length. That and it cost half as noteworthy! He allayed all my fears that the characterize quality wouldn't be very qualified. I was also going to be taking a straggle for a few weeks to Europe and really wanted a lens that could do it all. So I bought it and have been splendid pleased with my results.
Is it a pro lens? Not by any means. I know that if I kept the 24-70 the results would probably be better. But that being said, I am getting reliable results for half the brand. When I was in Europe having the 17-85 range was about as perfect as I could have wanted. It was light and diminutive enough that I could fit it into my compact Tamron Velocity 6 bag and the additional weight was negligible. The IS is a nice feature but don't judge that it makes up for the lack of aperture width. I tried to fool myself into thinking that when I bought the lens, but I explore now that having a fixed 2.8 is something you unprejudiced can't form up with IS. But other than that, I'm very blissful with this prefer. Another lens you might want to peek into if you're checking this one out is the Canon EF 17-40 f/4. It's comparable in heed, has a fixed f/4 but unbiased doesn't have the additional zoom length to it. Pictures are substantial though and it's also relatively compact. To learn more about this and other lenses, check out a spot I made for Canon Digital SLR users at www.eosrebels.com. Hopefully you'll procure it profitable in deciding which walkaround lens is good for you.
I have been using this lens for a week and getting absolutely flawless pictures - no flares, fringing etc. I also did some semi-controlled tests with Image Stablizer and it works as advertised, resulting in distinguished sharper pics indoors. USM focusing works mammoth too, and the lens is/feels well built.
One gripe - at $600, I would have liked it to advance with a hood ("sold" separately but not available yet) and a case (also "sold" separately) .
The sincere request IMO is not whether it's a tremendous lens or not, but whether it's worth $600 as opposed to the kit lens (EF-S 18-55) + EF 28-135 IS. This combo is $100 cheaper and gives greater coverage on the telephoto extinguish. On the other hand, EF-S 17-85 lens claims to have better optics, circular aperture, convenience of a single workhorse lens and IS on the wide kill too.
Ultimately it's your call. My remove is that if you utilize $800 to $1500 on a digital SLR, you owe it to yourself to use $600 on apt lenses (and another $200 on 420ex flash 
.
From a pure image quality standpoint, this lens will not please the pixel peepers. On the wide slay of the zoom, which I personally exercise more often than the telephoto demolish, this lens is not very animated, and it suffers from fairly terrible distortion. Worse than that, for me, are the chromatic abberations; this lens is quite prone to famous CA when shot at the wide kill, which can view a lot worse than a miniature bit of distortion or softness. Given the tag of this lens, one should question a higher level of optical performance.
The maximum aperture of this lens is not very ample, being f/4 on the wide slay, and f/5.6 on the telephoto ruin. The image stabilization makes up for this some, as you can comfortably shoot at grand slower shutter speeds than otherwise, but, let's be objective here; this lens is a awful performer if you want to shoot in rude light with no tripod. The cramped aperture makes for a gloomy viewfinder, which can be a very ample quandary if you are trying to manufacture a report in the sunless (using a tripod) .
Yet, I peaceful gave this very sinful lens four stars, and this is not without reason.
First of all, the focal length range is quite handy. It isn't a mega-zoom that does everything, however, it covers the most often former focal length ranges, and is an appropriate lens to consume for the astronomical majority of situations. The shrimp bit of extra zoom on the telephoto ruin is handy on occasion, and it's also worth noting that the lens sharpens up quite a bit when you zoom in some - it might be soft on the wide kill, but zoomed in, it's quite suitable.
I have printed as great as 20x30" using this lens on a Digital Rebel, and have no qualms with the results. Yes, there are sharper lenses out there, but you are a lot more likely to contemplate the inequity in sharpness on your computer monitor than in a print.
This lens has ring USM, which enables it to focus very quietly, and very lickety-split, whereas the slightly cheaper (and F2.8) options from the 3rd parties have normal focusing motors that are tiring, and noisy by comparison.
If you want to spend this lens indoors, you are best off getting a flash to go with it, such as a 430EX. The lens is usable in amazing indoor lighting, or during the day, but won't give you top-notch results in extreme light with no flash.
If you will be shooting in lower light situations (people in particular), Tamron and Sigma have some genuine options in the 17-50mm range with F2.8 apertures, and I would recommend those lenses over this one. If you'd engage the extra telephoto range, the image stabilization so you can shoot with smaller aperture in poorer lighting situations for greater depth of field (instead of needing to shoot a landscape at f/4, for instance, without image stabilization, you could expend f/11 on this lens, and score a interesting narrate with better depth of field. This is even more useful in the cessation focus range - while this isn't a correct macro lens, if you select closeup photos without a tripod, you will want to close the lens down for greater depth of field, and the IS helps with that quite a bit.
Overall, I've been fairly happy with the performance of this lens. If you like to exertion about splitting hairs, and zooming all the plot in on pictures on your computer, this lens is likely to dissapoint you. If, however, you are willing to sacrifice optical perfection to net a very well rounded, useful lens, then I'd recommend it, however, would also recommend that you believe the 3rd party options, as they are also stout lenses, and do offer a somewhat better value.
