Canon 17-85mm EF-S f4-5.6 IS USM review

I bought this lens to replace my Canon 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 II USM lens. I may have made a mistake. The 28-105mm is a handy lens if you don't need wide shots, which I don't. On my T2i it gives 45-168mm (approx), which is normal to a bit long. The 17-85mm seems to provide a more useful, carry around, every day range at 27-136mm. Plus it has IS. The problem I have is with the lens's weight. It is both bulkier and heavier than the 28-105mm. I know it's bulkier because it's wider (17mm vs 28mm), but the weight issue bothers me. It makes my T2i lens-heavy. The 28-105mm, on the other hand, balances nicely with the body. This lens is also longer and wider physically. I can understand it being wider, but if, focally, it's a shorter lens, shouldn't the lens itself be shorter? I use a hand strap and I can't see myself lugging this thing around for several hours of shooting. Bottom line: I bought the lens for the IS and the wider bottom end, but it weighs too much. I'm pretty sure you'll find this on ebay shortly. Edit: 12/19/11 - LENS CREEP! I carry my camera on a wrist strap and this lens creeps out. I wanted to give this thing another shot, but the lens creep thing is a deal breaker.

Be forewarned, this objetive is quite flexible and acceptable results .. BUT .. it tends to fail with error 99. I have a Canon 30D and I use several other objectives (all Canon) and none have failed. This objective after 6 months of use began to show autofocus problems, ending with my camera freezes with error 99 .. After an investigation and several tests I found that the problem is the autofocus system, in fact I can use this with manual focus and works well .. Definitely, this lens has its weakness in its construction and / or design, since there are several people who have had the same drawback.

I'm primarily a point and shoot photographer who wants to be able to capture anything and everything, and this lens works well without carrying other lenses. It is fun and easy to use, and produces good results. Are there things that I'd change? Sure, there is always room for improvement. The first thing that comes to mind is making this lens capable of focusing closer than 14-15 inches, but you can't have everything. It doesn't take long for this to become your favorite everyday lens.

There are three ways to evaluate the worth and value of a lens: Reviews that provide you measured numbers, Reviews that give you someone's opinion, and using it yourself.

I suppose all have some merit. Numbers are facts. If there is measurable falloff in the corners or low numerical resolution at a particular part of the zoom range such reviews will show it. People's opinions can have merit too - but first you kind of need a review of the reviewer. Do they know their stuff? Are their needs and expectations similar to your own? Have they used it enough to really know the Len's strengths and weaknesses?

The final one -- using it yourself is in the end the best. This because numbers say little about pictures. No, really, they don't. Doubt that? Then look at the great photos taken when even the best lenses lacked the basic qualities demanded of the least expensive SLR lenses today. Do you say "gee, great pic but the lens sucks"? No. And some people who write a review have special needs that will have little impact on YOU. An architectural photographer for instance. Even a little curvature in a straight line will drive him crazy. But on your vacation photos of the mountains or the beaches you won't even notice that flaw.

Fall off ("vignetting") can be a big deal if its bad. But most falloff from a modern DSLR lenses can be corrected almost 100% with basic software. (And the same is true for linear distortion btw.)

So the best way to check out a lens is to use it yourself.

All of these points came to me (again) when I purchased this EF-S 17 -85mm lens. Measurable fall off? At some zoom settings its got gobs. Distortion? At wide setting ditto. Resolution? Good to middling. But for all that this lens for many photographers -- including serious ones -- would be a great addition to their kit.

BYW, I probably would be judged in that later, "serious", category myself. I've earned a good living as a photographer for over 40 years. My work has graced hundreds of articles, books, and more recently, web sites. And my "art" images have been displayed in a 'one man show' in an art-conscious community.

OK then, what does my use tell me about this lens?

Pluses:

1) It has a really useful zoom range that encompasses a wide range of shots.
2) It is light and relatively compact.
3) Its resolution may not look great when presented in numbers, but it does look great in the photos I've taken with it.
4) When quick processed with appropriate editing software (I use Lightroom) the falloff and linear distortion is approximately zero.
5) Being discontinued and replaced by a measurably better but MUCH more expensive lens in Canon's catalog one can be be gotten for a song and maybe, with some luck, just a half stanza. (I got one recently in like new condition -- box, caps and all -- for less than $350.

Minuses:

1) Very limited macro capability
2) Some reported mechanical problems.

Regarding the positives: Yes! A Steal! Go for it!

Regarding the negatives: It is a daily use lens that for many photographers will see 3 or 4 (or more) time on their camera than a more extreme type of lens. Thus problems will on that basis alone be more common. And any problem is more likely to be mentioned in a review than none just because that is human nature. (Which of your feet are you most likely to mention in a conversation, the one that hurts or the one that doesn't?)

Bottom line: Find one cheap. Buy it. Use it. Enjoy! And for that price if it does break have it fixed.

That's what I did and it works for me. :)

I have owned the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 Image Stabilized USM SLR Lens over 3 years now and ive done everything with this lens!!! walking around lens event lens even night photography lens and the pics come out great!!!