Expired Hot Deals

[Canon.ca] Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens $749.99

  • Last Updated:
  • Oct 12th, 2019 1:35 pm
Deal Guru
Oct 27, 2003
13946 posts
4424 upvotes
Toronto
Squirrel99 wrote: I plan on keeping my 80D for a very long time but it would suck to buy this lens and not be able to re-sell it as easily if I do ever upgrade to full frame
I have a 6D (Mark 1) and a 70D and the 6D is way better for stills and depth of field control, the 70D is way better for video with its DPAF, so there's benefit to owning both.
Deal Guru
Oct 27, 2003
13946 posts
4424 upvotes
Toronto
Squirrel99 wrote: I could have bought it for 500 used once on Kijiji but it could have been a scam or in bad shape

Maybe someone will put one up on RFD for under 500 at some point :p
Look for someone selling it on Kijiji now and put in an offer for 500, you might be surprised what gets accepted. I would even hunt and be patient for $350 to $400 as Canon crop lenses are getting very unpopular, it's a buyers market.
Newbie
Feb 9, 2013
50 posts
55 upvotes
Vancouver
just be warned there was issues of grenading IS mechanism in the 17-55.
Deal Guru
Oct 27, 2003
13946 posts
4424 upvotes
Toronto
notslow65 wrote: just be warned there was issues of grenading IS mechanism in the 17-55.
Very easy to test IS when you buy, just set focal length to 55mm and shutter speed to 1/10 or 1/20 and take a pic of something non moving... if blur, IS no workie on that lens.

I would still get the Tamron and Sigma equivalent and save the $400 or so.
Deal Addict
Dec 27, 2007
3768 posts
1444 upvotes
Kurtz7834 wrote: I have a 6D (Mark 1) and a 70D and the 6D is way better for stills and depth of field control, the 70D is way better for video with its DPAF, so there's benefit to owning both.
Nice, no way I can afford both :p
Deal Guru
Oct 27, 2003
13946 posts
4424 upvotes
Toronto
Squirrel99 wrote: Nice, no way I can afford both :p
Stick with the 80D then as the equivalent full frame lenses are WAY more expensive. Especially wide angle.

70D also has much better autofocus vs 6D.
Deal Addict
Dec 27, 2007
3768 posts
1444 upvotes
Kurtz7834 wrote: Stick with the 80D then as the equivalent full frame lenses are WAY more expensive. Especially wide angle.

70D also has much better autofocus vs 6D.
Oh I'm aware of how much full frame lenses cost lol
Newbie
Feb 9, 2013
50 posts
55 upvotes
Vancouver
Kurtz7834 wrote: As long as Sony A7 full frame emount lenses remain so expensive, Canon EF lenses are gonna hold their value very well. Lots of A7 and A9 guys using adapted Canon lenses.

Canon will also have to support the EF pro market for at least another 10 years, if not longer. EF is not going anywhere.

EF-S on the other hand is getting dumped all over the place and prices of those lenses are plummeting. Hence why I said that it is nuts to spend $750 on the lens in the OP.
I shoot 5dmk3/5dmk4 and a pair of Sony A73. I shoot with a bag full of Canon L glass and Gmaster glass as well as Sigma Art lenses (35 f/1.2 and 105mm f/1.4)

I will NOT use my Sigma MC-11 and adapt Canon glass. It simply negates the benefits of the Sony AF system. I was so frustrated with my 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2 that I went out and bought a Gmaster 70-200 f/2.8! For slow or static images the adapted glass works but will hunt in many cases.

I'm on the fence of selling my Canon kit as RF mount is going to be the next alternative. Canon has stopped R&D for most of their mirrored glass division.

At this moment in time it's real difficult to buy mirrored EF-S or EF glass due to old tech. My A73 with Sigma 24mm art f/1.4 puts my Canon 5dmk4 with 24Lmk2 to shame. This is where things have changed in the camera hardware world.

RF canon glass is just as expensive as Sony e mount glass. EF glass is old tech and is decent but it's still not providing identical image quality as mirrorless with native glass. Please note I still use EF L glass but no one is excited about mirrored anymore. Mirrorless is the way of the future and we cannot change this......
Deal Guru
Oct 27, 2003
13946 posts
4424 upvotes
Toronto
Squirrel99 wrote: So you're saying I should wait for a used 17-55 to drop even more in price :D

I pretty much only use my 70-200 F4L anyway, or a Sigma 70mm EX 2.8 Macro
Rarely ever use the 18-55 kit lens as I mostly take pictures of animals or nature
Fair enough, that's some heavy gear (weight wise).

I can't see the Canon 17-55 being useful or necessary for the type of shooting you do, to be honest, unless you need to do low light wide angle, and if so there are much cheaper options. 24mm f2.8, 10-18 IS STM, etc.

The Canon 17-55 f2.8 got a huge cult following back when full frame gear was much more expensive, and far more people were shooting crop.

Now the market has changed and I can't recommend it at these prices.
Deal Guru
Oct 27, 2003
13946 posts
4424 upvotes
Toronto
notslow65 wrote: I shoot 5dmk3/5dmk4 and a pair of Sony A73. I shoot with a bag full of Canon L glass and Gmaster glass as well as Sigma Art lenses (35 f/1.2 and 105mm f/1.4)

I will NOT use my Sigma MC-11 and adapt Canon glass. It simply negates the benefits of the Sony AF system. I was so frustrated with my 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2 that I went out and bought a Gmaster 70-200 f/2.8! For slow or static images the adapted glass works but will hunt in many cases.

I'm on the fence of selling my Canon kit as RF mount is going to be the next alternative. Canon has stopped R&D for most of their mirrored glass division.

At this moment in time it's real difficult to buy mirrored EF-S or EF glass due to old tech. My A73 with Sigma 24mm art f/1.4 puts my Canon 5dmk4 with 24Lmk2 to shame. This is where things have changed in the camera hardware world.

RF canon glass is just as expensive as Sony e mount glass. EF glass is old tech and is decent but it's still not providing identical image quality as mirrorless with native glass. Please note I still use EF L glass but no one is excited about mirrored anymore. Mirrorless is the way of the future and we cannot change this......
To each his own, but I do paid shooting here and there and you will have to pry my 6D and my cheap EF glass from my cold dead hands. Who cares if it's exciting, it's cheap, reliable, durable and it just works. I do portrait shooting so your needs and experiences may vary. Portrait shooting has low hardware demands and is mostly about the light and posing. If I did sports photography I'd have very different needs.

As a photographer, your lighting is much more important than the camera body you are using anyways. I'd get more for my money buying new strobes like AD200 or good light modifiers than upgrading my camera body.

As for image quality, it depends, if you pixel peep it may not measure up but lots of pros still using ancient stuff like 5D2, 50D etc and getting great results. If you need huge crops and stuff then you will want the new 45 megapixel bodies.
Last edited by Kurtz7834 on Oct 10th, 2019 5:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Deal Guru
Oct 27, 2003
13946 posts
4424 upvotes
Toronto
Squirrel99 wrote: Oh I'm aware of how much full frame lenses cost lol
Try to pick up EF lenses that work on both systems. 50 f1.8, 40 f2.8 etc.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Jul 12, 2003
11254 posts
3502 upvotes
Toronto
I had this lens for a few years and used Tamron and Sigma prior. I can tell the image from the Canon is much sharper.
I love the Zoom lens and my all around lens, used together with a 7D (back to 4-5 yrs ago).

Yes, It is expensive, I bought for 1000+ at that time. 749.99 is good price a new lens.
Retired Forum Moderator February 2009 - June 2015
Deal Guru
Oct 27, 2003
13946 posts
4424 upvotes
Toronto
MP3_SKY wrote: I had this lens for a few years and used Tamron and Sigma prior. I can tell the image from the Canon is much sharper.
I love the Zoom lens and my all around lens, used together with a 7D (back to 4-5 yrs ago).

Yes, It is expensive, I bought for 1000+ at that time. 749.99 is good price a new lens.
I'm sure the Canon is better, I've also heard that there is a lot of sample variation in the Tamron and Sigma lenses, with good copies and bad copies out there.

I think anyone who needs the best possible image quality has moved away from Canon EF-S in general, it's become a "budget" system.
Newbie
Feb 9, 2013
50 posts
55 upvotes
Vancouver
Kurtz7834 wrote: To each his own, but I do paid shooting here and there and you will have to pry my 6D and my cheap EF glass from my cold dead hands. Who cares if it's exciting, it's cheap, reliable, durable and it just works. I do portrait shooting so your needs and experiences may vary. Portrait shooting has low hardware demands and is mostly about the light and posing. If I did sports photography I'd have very different needs.

As a photographer, your lighting is much more important than the camera body you are using anyways. I'd get more for my money buying new strobes like AD200 or good light modifiers than upgrading my camera body.

As for image quality, it depends, if you pixel peep it may not measure up but lots of pros still using ancient stuff like 5D2, 50D etc and getting great results. If you need huge crops and stuff then you will want the new 45 megapixel bodies.
I only use memory dual card bodies as redundancy to assure files for my clients. I owned xti, 40d, 50d, hate the 7d, 80D, 5dmk3,4 and will not buy EOS R or RP due to lack of dual cards. I didn't care for the 50D raw files as far as colour is concerned but the 5dmk2 was rather decent for it's time for available light shooting.

I would suggest the cheapest dual card solution would be to buy a used 5mdk3. This body has the same IQ as a 5dmk2. BUT the 5d3 has better high iso performance except it still has magenta in the shadows. 6d mk1 is a great camera and so is the 6dmk2 but again it's does not have dual cards for redundancy.

The suggestion of EF glass is sound. EF-S is not really something I'd suggest due to it's finite life in the camera world as new tech is coming along quickly.

Godox Ad200 is great and cheap but I'd use the Pro version as it will not present as much colour shift.....that's another story all together. Shooting strobes you can make any modern camera work well due to ideal light.

For mirrored bodies I'd suggest sticking with OE as there would be most likely less issues of back/front focus. Not always the case but it's up to the photog. For mirrorless I'd will use anything that has good and reliable AF. I hate Sigma for mirrored bodies but I am happy with the 24 f/1.4 ART, 35 f/1.2 ART and 105 f/1.4 ART.

If a photog has micro adjust then that's a good feature for canon mirrored bodies.

I'd even suggest the old Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 VC due to price point and it works rather well. If you analyze the 80D with 17-55IS I'd actually give the edge to a Fuji X-t2 with 18-55 stabilized kit lens. I've owned pretty much all of the fuji aps-c line but sold it due to aps-c sensor not meeting my low light needs. The Fuji file has a more rich colour even in raw form. Why do I say this??? because if you analyze your shooting style the fuji might work better for you. It all depends on your style.
Sr. Member
User avatar
Oct 3, 2008
527 posts
97 upvotes
Scarborough
Squirrel99 wrote: I could have bought it for 500 used once on Kijiji but it could have been a scam or in bad shape

Maybe someone will put one up on RFD for under 500 at some point :p
RFD is not always reputable, i bought it from an ex-mod here for $500 a year ago. Tested in a loud starbucks environment. Things focused properly until i tested it some more at home. Found a failing focus motor where theres clock ticking whenever it focuses and the tick would last another 2 second before it stops. It occasionally doesn't focus. The focus ring is worn out shows quite a bit of wear. Asked for a return because of deception and was rejected as he said it was normal. I went downtown to Henrys to check a brand new lens and their demo lens not a single click when focusing. And yes, i asked the guys at Henry what they thought too.

Moral of the story is, don't trust anyone anywhere.

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)