Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 24, 2005, 10:20 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 78
Default

I've been using Canon camera's for over thirty years, starting with the mechanical FTb. Every time Canon moved the technology forword I moved with them from mechanical to electronic, from the EF mounts to the EOS (Electro Optical System)from film to digital.In other words every new generation of product.

The EOS XT Rebel combined with the EFS 17-85 IS zoom is in my opinion, themostimpressivecombination of ergonomics, compactness, versatility, walk around optical rangeand pure image quality of any camera lens combination I've ever used. I also own the 20D but find myself prefering the XT in almost every situation except maybe in studio ifI need a pc contact.

The tightness & fit and finish was better than my 20D. It's like holding one sculpted, solidpiece.

The XT combined with the superb 17-85 IS produces absolutey professional quality images on par with anythng I've ever used. I'veowned L series glass that's not as good as the 17-85.

For me , the camera lens combination with a vertical grip attached is just about as ideal aphotograpic toolas I can imagine. The balance and ergonomic feel is so good I don't want to put it down. Pure joy to use.

tonyM


tmumolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 26, 2005, 2:37 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 155
Default

And how many years have you worked for Canon Marketing and Public Relations?

I've been considering replacing my 300D with a 350D, but I have not seen a review that wasasglowing as yours. I too started a while back--earlier than you, maybe, with a Canon FT in 1967 (A few months later I switched to Nikon, where I stayed until 2003). I also have a 20D, and I have the 17-85 which I often recommend to those asking about an all-purpose lens. I have to take issue with your assessment of the 17-85, even though I still recommend it, because that lens has a number of flaws:

1. Too expensive. S/B about $400, like the 28-135IS. Canon further hurt its customers financially by NOT using the same filter threads and lens shade as the 28-135--and it could have done that easily.

2. Purple and green fringing is pretty noticable with high contrast, like a mountain or treetops hitting the sky. I do have a Photoshop Action, which helps clean it up, though.

3. The lens suffers from pincushion and barrel distortion almost as badly as the zoom lenses of the 70s.

That said, the 17-85 is still my favorite lens. It provides the range of a 28-135 for 1.6x sensor cameras (actually 27-136 in FOV). Along with the 100-400LIS, you have a nearly complete two-lens image-stabilized set with the 35mm equivalent of 27 to 640mm. I also carry the Sigma 12-24 when traveling, but I don't use it much.

Anyway, while I can hardly believe that any camera could be as good as you report, I have to admit I am tempted...

Have a good one.

Bill
wburychka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 4:35 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 610
Default

tmumolo wrote:
Quote:
I'veowned L series glass that's not as good as the 17-85.

tonyM


what a total bull..sh*t! get real pal
tuanokc@hotmail.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 6:44 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 78
Default



I'll try to be more specific and hopefully more civil than the last persons post.

When I replaced my 10D with the 20D I bought the 17-85 IS to go with it. I do family photography for a living, as well as art photography. The results I got back from the lab using the 17-85, i.e.photo's , were very good. Very sharp withexcellent contrast and color.

I've owned 2 differant copies of the 24-70 L and one copy of the 17-40 L

Neither24-70L lenswas assharp and contrastyas the 17-85,although the color was slightly better. The 17-40L was better regarding colorandwas equivelant to the 17-85 in sharpness and contrast. I was floored by these results although they have been confirmed by others on this forum.

Do a search and check it out. The MTFcurvesfor the 17-85arebetter than the 24-70L

But I didn't have to rely on resolution charts, I saw it on professionally printed photo's. It was there for anyone to see.

Consideringthe 17-85 has a double sided aspherical element, optimized multicoating to enhance digital performance and has IS it shouldn't be a surprise that it's a strong performer. What is a surprise is that it's as good as it is.

I spent a lot of money chasing the L train and I still own a 70-200L f.4 which is superb so I'm not trying to sell anything to ANYONE. I'ts cost me well over $2500.00 to arrive at this conclusion and I'm not happy about that so it's a little annoying to have someone dismiss what I'm saying without doing some due diligence.

These are my results. You do your ownresearch and decide for yourself. I like this lens so much that I put one of both my 20D and my Rebel XT as primary lenses. I soldmy 24-70L's and a 17-40L and no I have not had any color fringing problems with this lens.

BTW there is a strange virus going around, it's called the "if anyone has a strongly positive take on a particular product they must be a rep, virus"

Pretty silly.

tonyM
tmumolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 9:55 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Kanji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 370
Default

I just got a 350d xt , and you description of the EFS 17-85 IShas tempted me to go down and try one out, thanks for the tip.
Kanji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2005, 2:31 AM   #6
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

I've never seen any colour fringing on my 17-85 and I have, for my sins, taken lots of photos that included leafless trees against overcast skies. I have seen a number of examples of this on the net though from early production lenses.

It's also very sharp.

There is certainly distortion at the wide end, but if you do lots of architectural work then something like DXO optics can correct that very easily.

The only thing that I occasionally find intrusive is vignetting, once again easily fixed in PS or DXO, though I'll admit I sometimes use a UV filter which doubtless is partially responsible. The vignetting is there even when I remove the filter though, and strangely it's not only at the wide end, I find it to be present at the telephoto end too.

Overall though I'm very happy with it.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2005, 9:12 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 301
Default

tmumolo wrote:
Quote:
Do a search and check it out. The MTFcurvesfor the 17-85arebetter than the 24-70L

I have, and Canon USA doesn't seem to post an MTF chart for the 17-85, and I've heard others complain that they can't find one. I'd appreciate it if you could provide us with a link:-)

I'm sure that the 17-85 is a terrific lens, but the 24-70 has a pretty decent MTF chart, so it would be interesting to see how hard you would have to squint to determine any zoom in its category is better.

The only problem that I see with the 17-85 is that it is too slow for me (f4 -5.6). However it's a really nice zoom range.



Regards,

Bob
BobA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2005, 9:12 AM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 78
Default

Revision:

I still have the 70-200 f.4 L and I think it's the shapest lens I've ever used. The three other L lens's I've owned and have since sold were the 28-70L , 24-70L and 17-40L.

I had said I owned two 24-70's. That was incorrect, the first one was the 28-70.

I loved the 17-40L and the only reason I sold it was because I got the same quality and more reach with the 17-85. I'm not saying the lens is perfect and totally free of any distortions at the wide end, very few wides are. As far as build quality goes, all of the L's were more robust in construction. Whichyou would expect from a lens intended for rough treatment and harsh conditions. Construction is a seperate issue and I wasonlyaddressing optical quality.

In my opinion the only thing that keeps Canon from designating the 17-85 as an L lens is build quality not optics.

tony
tmumolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2005, 9:30 AM   #9
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

For a full set of Canon MTF charts check out the Hong Kong site (bookmark it!) :

http://www.canon.com.hk/En/Product/S...category_id=25

To save you some time here's a direct link to the 17-85.

http://www.canon.com.hk/En/Product/P...1&tag_id=10515

I bet your first response is WOW.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2005, 9:36 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 78
Default

Hi Bob

I meant do a search in Steve's forums. In discussing the 17-85 in another thread one of the posters had access to the chart and relayed the info. That aside, my personal impirical observations confirmed the sharpness issue for me. Speed and contruction are completely seperate considerations and the 17-85 is certainly not a fast lens but the IS does a great job of compensating for the lack of speed.

The ISmakes itequivelantto being two or more stops faster. Of course this is not a benefit if you are shooting action shots in low light, in that case you would definately need a faster lens. btw Many have complained that the 17-40L was not distortion free at the wide end either.

Incidentally, I wish I could say it was hard for me to see the differance in sharpness between the 28-70/24-70L and the 17-85 but the fact is that it was obvious. If you have ever shot protraits the thing you notice in a really fine lens is that the eyes seem to glisten andare sharp and crystal clear. It used to be that you could only get that from a prime non zoomlens. That's what I get with the 17-85 and did not get with the 28 or 24-70L's.

Just so there is no misunderstanding I found that the 17-40L and the 70-200L are both sharper than the two other L's iin my experience. The 70-200 f.4 being the sharpest of them all.

tony
tmumolo is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:13 AM.