A&P Whats the opinions on a Canon 17 -85 IS?

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by asshole, Mar 12, 2008.

  1. asshole

    asshole dont eat yellow snow! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere..everyone has an asshole
    I have an opportunity to buy a Canon 17-85 IS for $300 it seems like a good deal.. i just want another lens thats a bit wider than my 28-135. I dont have alot of cash to spend about $300 or so... what does everyone think?
    Should i just save my cash and get a 17-40L or something? OR a 10-22?
    let me know.
    Thanks!

    this is the exact lens
    Canon 17-85 Canon Zoom Super Wide Angle EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
    I've only taken about 50 shots with it. Will sell with UV filter and blank warranty. This is a USA lens and I have the receipt to show it.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2008
  2. e.pie

    e.pie Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    91,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KFLY
    it's pretty average, a lot better then the kit lens though :o
     
  3. iridium130

    iridium130 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    6,034
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Anaheim Hills, CA --> Denver, CO
    I have the 17-85 and 28-135...I love the wide-ness of the 17-85 and I don't really miss the reach of the 28-135.

    It's not a bad lens, it's decently sharp, but you won't ever confuse it for L.
     
  4. asshole

    asshole dont eat yellow snow! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere..everyone has an asshole
    Yeah i just want a wider range .. i cant really afford a 10-22 at this point unless i find one on CL or someone wants to hook me up.. so i figure a 17-85 wouldnt be that bad and i thought $300 isnt that bad of a price.

    ALso whats everyones opinions on flashes...

    IS the 480EX okay or should i just bite it and get the 580exII?
     
  5. asshole

    asshole dont eat yellow snow! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere..everyone has an asshole
    ALso is $300 a good price for this 17-85 IS?
    he claims it hasnt really been used as he has the 17-55
     
  6. FlashhslaF

    FlashhslaF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    4,586
    Likes Received:
    0
    It was one of the lenses I considered when buying mine.

    I suggests you also look at the Sigma 18-50 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8, Sigma 17-70.

    The tamron is the most expensive around 400~. The Sigmas are around 350~.

    Do a comparison between the Canon and these.....I Personally went with the Tamron simply based on the constant 2.8 and 17 on the wide end.
     
  7. asshole

    asshole dont eat yellow snow! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere..everyone has an asshole
    Yeah i just dont want to piss away 300 bux if there is a better option. I just though the canon might be better than those since it has the IS features and canon tends to have good lenses.
     
  8. e.pie

    e.pie Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    91,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KFLY
    get a used 550ex for cheaper then either of those
     
  9. GregFarz78

    GregFarz78 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Messages:
    64,128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    $300 is a pretty good price
     
  10. asshole

    asshole dont eat yellow snow! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere..everyone has an asshole
    Why? I have credit at BB so i was going to just use it to get one... I did just do a search and found one of these 550ex's for $200!!

    Is the 550ex better than the 480? <---- im a nimrod.. i would assume so since the 550 is a higher number ;)
     
  11. FlashhslaF

    FlashhslaF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    4,586
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with others, the price is good at 300, but there are better options for a bit more.

    The IS feature is mostly effective for higher end of your zoom length. I do sometimes wish the Tamron had some sort of IS...i hate the fact that I have to lug around a tripod to get good stable shots in the dark

    But Personally in the end it is the IQ that is most important....the IS can be solved with a tripod/monopod, but the IQ remains what it is.

    You have to consider what is most important to you. If you are on a strict budget, then go for the Canon. If you are flexible, then there are better lenses out there for a bit more. I had the same thought when i did my reasearch that Canon has to be better than the 3rd partly lenses, you might be surprised at the quality of the Tamron and the Sigma.
     
  12. e.pie

    e.pie Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    91,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KFLY
    550ex is the model the 580ex replaced
     
  13. asshole

    asshole dont eat yellow snow! OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere..everyone has an asshole
    I did just find a 17 -40 L if im not mistaken for $400!! So i might just go for that. So we'll see if he responds
     

Share This Page