17-55mm... should I keep it or sell it???

[jdramirez]

First of all, my gear:

Body: 5d mkiii
All purpose zoom: 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Tele-zoom: 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkii
Primes: 8mm Rokinon fisheye & 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro which I am selling and will replace with a 135mm f/2L which will then eventually be replace by an 85mm f/1.2L prime
Speedlite: 430ex mkii and I am in the market for a 90 ex to use as a hotshoe master for off camera triggering.

Now the circumstances I find myself in. I was looking for a backup for my mkiii just incase it decides to flip out one day and I'm stuck without a camera for a week or two (though I know CPS is good about giving you a temporary replacement.

Well... what I did was buy a 17-55mm and a 50D. I previously had a 60D and my lone issue with the 60D was the lack of AFMA. I know AFMA is less of a concern at f/4 and above, but as discussed above, I'm looking at f/2 and eventually f/1.2. And yes, I will more often than not use those lenses on the mkiii, but you never know.

Part of the reason I wanted the 17-55 is to get a sense of the focal length. On the 50D, the focal length is roughly 27-88. If I have the focal length, then I know I won't care for the 24-70 f/2.8L USM mkii. Also, the extra stop would be nice... but again... if I'm going to an indoor event... I can't imagine taking the 50D over the mkiii.

So am I going to use the lens? I'm almost leaning towards no. I have it up on Amazon, so if it sells the decision is out of my hands... Dang EF-s...

 

[bholliman]

If you sell your 17-55, your options will be limited to longer focal lengths with your 50D, as your 24-105 will be effectively 38-170 on the crop body. When I bought a 6D, I kept my 7D and my favorite EF-S lens, the 15-85mm, and still use it as well as my 70-200 on the 7D. The 17-55 is as good or better than the 15-85 (both are excellent).

So, I'd recommend hanging onto it if you plan the use the 50D much, but its your call.

 

[Loswr]

I had planned to keep my 17-55 as long as I had an APS-C body. But after getting the 5DII + 24-105L, I really didn't use the 17-55 much at all, and after getting the 1D X, I pretty much stopped using the 7D. So I sold the 17-55...

 

[jdramirez]

If you sell your 17-55, your options will be limited to longer focal lengths with your 50D, as your 24-105 will be effectively 38-170 on the crop body. When I bought a 6D, I kept my 7D and my favorite EF-S lens, the 15-85mm, and still use it as well as my 70-200 on the 7D. The 17-55 is as good or better than the 15-85 (both are excellent).

So, I'd recommend hanging onto it if you plan the use the 50D much, but its your call.

That's a valid point... but I think if I decide to go with the two bodies at one shoot, I'll use the 1.6 conversion factor on my longer lens (70-200) to get a touch more reach.

 

[jdramirez]

I had planned to keep my 17-55 as long as I had an APS-C body. But after getting the 5DII + 24-105L, I really didn't use the 17-55 much at all, and after getting the 1D X, I pretty much stopped using the 7D. So I sold the 17-55...

And I think that is my concern. So I'll keep it until it sells and then I'll at least be able to provide an opinion on the lens when people ask whether it is worth the amount of money.

Speaking of money... what did your's sell for?

 

[Zv]

No way! I am almost in the same position. My 17-55 is also up for sale on amazon! I went through the exact same question in my head. I have the 25-105 for general use, do I need the 17-55 on my 7D for a backup? I decided that my 17-40 will double up as a general purpose zoom on the 7D if it ever came to that and rather than have the 17-55 collect dust (and it excels at that!!) I should sell it. Trouble is folk are selling them for like $600, that's too cheap!

So yeah, sell it. You'll likely not need it if you have the 24-105L. If the 5D3 does break down then you could still use the it with the 50D.

(Sorry I should point out that mine is on amazon.jp and we are not in direct competition!)

 

[Zv]

First of all, my gear:

Body: 5d mkiii
All purpose zoom: 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Tele-zoom: 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkii
Primes: 8mm Rokinon fisheye & 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro which I am selling and will replace with a 135mm f/2L which will then eventually be replace by an 85mm f/1.2L prime
Speedlite: 430ex mkii and I am in the market for a 90 ex to use as a hotshoe master for off camera triggering.

Now the circumstances I find myself in. I was looking for a backup for my mkiii just incase it decides to flip out one day and I'm stuck without a camera for a week or two (though I know CPS is good about giving you a temporary replacement.

Well... what I did was buy a 17-55mm and a 50D. I previously had a 60D and my lone issue with the 60D was the lack of AFMA. I know AFMA is less of a concern at f/4 and above, but as discussed above, I'm looking at f/2 and eventually f/1.2. And yes, I will more often than not use those lenses on the mkiii, but you never know.

Part of the reason I wanted the 17-55 is to get a sense of the focal length. On the 50D, the focal length is roughly 27-88. If I have the focal length, then I know I won't care for the 24-70 f/2.8L USM mkii. Also, the extra stop would be nice... but again... if I'm going to an indoor event... I can't imagine taking the 50D over the mkiii.

So am I going to use the lens? I'm almost leaning towards no. I have it up on Amazon, so if it sells the decision is out of my hands... Dang EF-s...

As long as you have ANY crop body (besides a 1D series) KEEP that 17-55. It's the perfect walk around on your 50D. I much preferred mine (when I still had my 40D) compared to my 17-40, 16-35, or 24-70 on crop use.=. It's just too good of a range to give up.

But he has a 5D3 and 24-105, which has a better range! Why would he walk around with less range? Don't get me wrong if all you have is a crop body I fully recommend the 17-55 as a walkaround. But now that I have my 24-105 I will use that as a walkaround lens. Am I missing something?

 

[jdramirez]

$600 seems WAY too low. Here in the states, the lens is selling at $720+, but those are just launched with no track record. I have been selling for years with a great reputation, so I'm asking $740. I figure a good track record has to be worth $20.

I'm probably going to keep playing with the 17-55... just to see if I would be ok going to a 24-70. I'll have the 85mm and the 70-200 when I want amazing sharpness and small depth of field. The 24-105 is there when I can't plan for what it is that I am shooting and I guess it will stay that way.

No way! I am almost in the same position. My 17-55 is also up for sale on amazon! I went through the exact same question in my head. I have the 25-105 for general use, do I need the 17-55 on my 7D for a backup? I decided that my 17-40 will double up as a general purpose zoom on the 7D if it ever came to that and rather than have the 17-55 collect dust (and it excels at that!!) I should sell it. Trouble is folk are selling them for like $600, that's too cheap!

So yeah, sell it. You'll likely not need it if you have the 24-105L. If the 5D3 does break down then you could still use the it with the 50D.

(Sorry I should point out that mine is on amazon.jp and we are not in direct competition!)

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I sold my 17-55 a few months after selling my 40D and going to FF totally, so when I bought a refurb 7D a year later, I bought a 15-85. Now that I have a 16-35 which works on my FF and on crop, I'm well covered.
I'm not sure why I'm keeping the 15-85, I just like it for all around use.

 

[jdramirez]

I sold my 17-55 a few months after selling my 40D and going to FF totally, so when I bought a refurb 7D a year later, I bought a 15-85. Now that I have a 16-35 which works on my FF and on crop, I'm well covered.
I'm not sure why I'm keeping the 15-85, I just like it for all around use.

I feel bad when I do use my lenses. Almost like they are on the playground and are never picked to get into the game.

 

[Zv]

$600 seems WAY too low. Here in the states, the lens is selling at $720+, but those are just launched with no track record. I have been selling for years with a great reputation, so I'm asking $740. I figure a good track record has to be worth $20.

I'm probably going to keep playing with the 17-55... just to see if I would be ok going to a 24-70. I'll have the 85mm and the 70-200 when I want amazing sharpness and small depth of field. The 24-105 is there when I can't plan for what it is that I am shooting and I guess it will stay that way.

No way! I am almost in the same position. My 17-55 is also up for sale on amazon! I went through the exact same question in my head. I have the 25-105 for general use, do I need the 17-55 on my 7D for a backup? I decided that my 17-40 will double up as a general purpose zoom on the 7D if it ever came to that and rather than have the 17-55 collect dust (and it excels at that!!) I should sell it. Trouble is folk are selling them for like $600, that's too cheap!

So yeah, sell it. You'll likely not need it if you have the 24-105L. If the 5D3 does break down then you could still use the it with the 50D.

(Sorry I should point out that mine is on amazon.jp and we are not in direct competition!)

I know what you mean. I bought my 17-55 for ¥92,000 and now it's ¥106,000 but there are sellers that are practically giving the lens away at ¥59,000! No way am I giving it away for that price, especially after Canon cleaned it. Unfortunately I'm a new seller and have bugger all ratings. This lens is a money pit!

 

[jdramirez]

$600 seems WAY too low. Here in the states, the lens is selling at $720+, but those are just launched with no track record. I have been selling for years with a great reputation, so I'm asking $740. I figure a good track record has to be worth $20.

I'm probably going to keep playing with the 17-55... just to see if I would be ok going to a 24-70. I'll have the 85mm and the 70-200 when I want amazing sharpness and small depth of field. The 24-105 is there when I can't plan for what it is that I am shooting and I guess it will stay that way.

No way! I am almost in the same position. My 17-55 is also up for sale on amazon! I went through the exact same question in my head. I have the 25-105 for general use, do I need the 17-55 on my 7D for a backup? I decided that my 17-40 will double up as a general purpose zoom on the 7D if it ever came to that and rather than have the 17-55 collect dust (and it excels at that!!) I should sell it. Trouble is folk are selling them for like $600, that's too cheap!

So yeah, sell it. You'll likely not need it if you have the 24-105L. If the 5D3 does break down then you could still use the it with the 50D.

(Sorry I should point out that mine is on amazon.jp and we are not in direct competition!)

I know what you mean. I bought my 17-55 for ¥92,000 and now it's ¥106,000 but there are sellers that are practically giving the lens away at ¥59,000! No way am I giving it away for that price, especially after Canon cleaned it. Unfortunately I'm a new seller and have bugger all ratings. This lens is a money pit!

There are a few lenses that Canon has that don't hold their value nearly as well as I would hope. Just off the top of my head, the 17-55, the 15-85, the 24-105 (provided you paid retail prices for it), and the 17-40.

 

[bholliman]

I think if I decide to go with the two bodies at one shoot, I'll use the 1.6 conversion factor on my longer lens (70-200) to get a touch more reach.

Good point. After I think about it, I seldom use my 15-85 anymore, even though I love it. The 7D/15-85 combo just can't match the IQ of my 6D/24-105 (or 24-70 2.8 II that I just ordered yesterday). When I use my 7D, its normally with the 70-200 for reach or 35 1.4.

 

[The_Arsonist]

We need to make a poll to see how many Canon Rumors members are currently listing their 17-55 on Amazon. I believe I make it two for Amazon US

 

[Zv]

We need to make a poll to see how many Canon Rumors members are currently listing their 17-55 on Amazon. I believe I make it two for Amazon US

I'm interested in CR members that wanna buy them!

 

[G-V]

I've owned a 50D with three AF-S lenses for the past 4 years, and I just bought a 6D with a 24-105L...

After comparing image quality, I just feel really sorry for my 50D and the EF-S lenses :-\

But that's how the market works.

Why use a 50D and EF-S lenses when you have a 5DMKiii with EF L lenses???

 

[Zv]

I also did a non scientific side by side comparison with the 7D/17-55 vs 5D2/24-105. At all apertures and focal lengths the full frame combo was not only sharper but showed less noise and smoother gradients. However the 17-55 did show slightly less purple fringing at the corners than my 25-105. Center CA was non existent on both. However this was when viewed at 100% so I guess for web use the two are fairly similar. I might try te 24-105 on the 7D and see how it goes.

 

[jdramirez]

We need to make a poll to see how many Canon Rumors members are currently listing their 17-55 on Amazon. I believe I make it two for Amazon US

So you are my competition... I hope you sell yours... after I sell mine. But I'm talking only 10 minutes or so; it doesn't have to be a long wait.

Speaking of waiting, how long has it been listed? I have put some lenses up at 10p.m. and they sold by 11p.m. that same night... but I'm guessing I'll have to play the waiting game with this one.

 

[jdramirez]

I've owned a 50D with three AF-S lenses for the past 4 years, and I just bought a 6D with a 24-105L...

After comparing image quality, I just feel really sorry for my 50D and the EF-S lenses :-\

But that's how the market works.

Why use a 50D and EF-S lenses when you have a 5DMKiii with EF L lenses???

To avoid switching lenses. I thought the image quality of my 60D was pretty impressive in good light (1/6000 of a second shutter speeds) and and iso of 100.

I had a whole thing written up... but it comes down to you being right.

 

[Tanja]

sell it.