Header banner
Revain logoHome Page

Reviews

Global ratings 73
  • 5
    42
  • 4
    23
  • 3
    7
  • 2
    0
  • 1
    1

Type of review

Revainrating 5 out of 5

Reliable purchase, guaranteed to be a good purchase.

1. when choosing 24-105 and 17-55, do not even think about taking 17-55! - it is better in many ways (2.8, focusing speed and tenacity, it is better and faster to sell used) 2. after purchase, immediately take a normal protective filter, as a good option Hoya HD Protect 77 mm. (Do not take UV - this is a waste of money, better save it for future expenses;))) 3. IMHO 17-40 and 24-105 is a way out of the situation with the difficulty of buying 24-70 for FF owners. A 17-55 mm. this is the best…

Pros
  • I have been using them for 4 months now! Emotions are only positive. The quality and operation of the focus speed are on the level. The colors are real, they don't bring in their own. The 60D + 17-55 camera looks very impressive and amazing, and even with a hood;) With my dimensions (184 height), the dimensions and weight are optimal. There is no dust for 4 months and cannot be - upon purchase, I immediately wound Hoya HD 77 mm. and the heart is now calm behind the front lens;) The path to choosing 17-55 was 7 months long, reading forums, pro surveys, shopping and salons. The main meal of choice was 24-105 or 17-55?! I made such a decision for myself - 17-55. On focal points: I was arrogant, but in vain 55 mm suits me quite well. For portraits and subject shooting, it is the most. For the body you need 70-200 ! I got a high-quality copy without back and front focus, gave it for adjustment - confirmed! Added after a year of use. The euphoria after the purchase has already passed and I write what it really is: never disappointed in the lens. There was no thought of replacing it with the L series (on these focal lengths). Focal ones were enough and enough for 90%. I’m thinking about changing the carcass and damn it about changing the lens (24-70 II but the price for it is already different (((((68000) I don’t want to look at something else after mine. No dust inside (protective filter taxis) I'm not a pro, but see for yourself: among my photos there are also successful ones (kmk). I'm still learning) And thanks to this lens, photography has grown from a hobby into a favorite vacation and favorite pastime.) http://fotki. . Ru/users/dim6901/ And another tip: do not buy cheap lenses. In this case, it is the price that determines the quality.
Cons
  • The absence of a lens hood and a long search for a native one (for 2500 !) - in the end I bought Flama for 350. with inscription for Canon. Its price is not a disadvantage! He's worth more! Expensive caliber for 77mm. filters (protective 1500, polarik 3000-4500 and beyond - I'm talking about standing firms). After a year of use: no flaws. And it is not heavy at all) Heavy is 70-200 II (1.5 kg)))

Revainrating 4 out of 5

A good product, more pros than cons.

I think many, when they took their first DSLRs and took their first pictures, thought in bewilderment: "It seems to be better than on a soap dish, but such beauty as in magazines is not even close." 17-55 is my first lens with which such beauty IS. I have almost forgotten what technical post-processing is, and I use Photoshop more and more for artistic purposes. But this is about the quality of shooting. If you calm down, unscrew it from the mount and look not THROUGH it, but AT it, it becomes

Pros
  • * In terms of sharpness, I can compare it with fifty dollars (at least 1.8, I didn’t use cooler ones), but at the same time a universal zoom. This is the most important virtue; * Distortion, aberrations and other vignetting are almost zero; * Unlike the 17-85 I used before, the ultrasonic motor doesn't beep like a crazy mouse; * Aperture + stabilizer.
Cons
  • * If focusing on a point is set, and this point is not particularly lit, autofocus is useless; * Vacuums, the trunk falls out by itself (I took it from my hands along with the check, judging by it, it was used for a little more than six months); * The long end is not so long. If you take in a set with 70-200, 15 mm (oral count with a smile) will be lost; * 77mm - it is expensive for someone to buy filters; * No lens hood included - for someone who bought a lens for thirty, it's a pity 500 on top; *EF-S only - someone thinks they're cool enough to buy a full frame.

Revainrating 4 out of 5

The product is okay, it's not a waste of money!

I sold a couple of fixes and took one universal one, took it new in Pixel. I shoot cities, views, cars. In terms of overall qualities, I think that this is a very good option, perhaps the best. It copes with its tasks, produces a sharp and saturated picture, but sometimes you have to focus for several seconds, because. focus in 60% of cases stops in the background (example: a car in the background of a summer residence). With the cost of the camera itself being 25 thousand, as in my case, it…

Pros
  • Versatility Sufficient sharpness if focused where needed =) The picture quality is higher only for the L-series is twice as expensive, so I don’t see the point of changing (I have a crop) Looks solid, that's a plus and a minus
Cons
  • Weight and stupid design with a constantly moving trunk. With my 200D, the drag is noticeable. Noisy focus, it is impossible to shoot video on autofocus. He's fast, and that's why he constantly jumps to the front and back plans, back and forth. After three years of use, there is a feeling that he began to soap. Well, you can forget about the quality of the background if you shoot at maximum zoom, for example, from bridges or viewing platforms. Picture quality, but no frills, I would say.

Revainrating 1 out of 5

Terrible product, not happy with the purchase!

If you have a Canon 60d or a similar crop camera with a Canon 18-135mm kit lens, I do not advise you to buy. The minimum difference in aperture ratio, the quality of the stabilizer, in my subjective opinion, is an order of magnitude worse than a kit lens. I also compared it with Canon 50mm 1.8 - a fix without a stabilizer, the 50mm picture is transparent and a razor in sharpness, if you managed to fix your hands. Focusing on many points due to the shallow depth of field is unpredictable. I…

Pros
  • Not found for camera 60d
Cons
  • Rarity, stabilizer operation, aperture ratio.

Revainrating 4 out of 5

Not a bad buy, well worth the money.

Analogues used: Canon 18-135 STM, 24-105 f4 L. This is with the same FR. I compared it with an alternative staffer CANON 24-105 f4 L in sunny weather, but with clouds, then in drizzling rain, and, finally, in an apartment with and without flash at aperture 5.6, as the most optimal for both lenses. I made the following conclusions: color 24-105 is a little warmer, livelier and more interesting to me personally. This one seemed a little more contrasting, apparently due to less pronounced warmth.

Pros
  • Constant f2.8. And sometimes working, that is, the sharpness is almost indistinguishable from f4, sometimes, of course, noticeably worse. Autofocus, even in very poor lighting conditions, is quite good, although refocusing with every half-press of the button, even if there was no change in focusing distance. The picture is more interesting compared to the Canon ef-s 18-135 STM (and probably other whale ones too). Well, good sharpness and the presence of a stabilizer. and all in all.
Cons
  • Overpriced. Distortion at 17mm, although for the landscape this can be turned into a plus. Lack of dust and moisture protection, which for such a price must be. Compared to EF lenses (24-105 f4 L, EF 40 STM) there is a noticeable reduction in detail towards the edges of the frame. And personally, it's not enough for me on the long end.

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I was surprised by the quality for this price.

I was looking for a universal crop zoom. At first I looked at the Sigma 17-50 f2.8. But after testing it for a week, I was disappointed, because. There were big problems with the autofocus. I decided not to compromise and buy the original device. Expectedly better autofocus performance than Sigma, comparable in sharpness (both lenses are good). I don't regret the purchase at all.

Pros
  • Constructive - nothing backlash, zooming is smooth. Constant aperture, and aperture 2.8 is absolutely working. Universal focal lengths. The stabilizer helps out when shooting handheld up to 1 / 20 sec.
Cons
  • There is no hood in the kit, the stabilizer is a bit noisy.

Revainrating 5 out of 5

Just super, the product is made wonderfully, very satisfied.

I got used to the lens very much and would not change it for anything. He is worth his money. Neither a tamron nor a sigma of the same kind lay nearby. There is a stub, fast accurate autofocus, accurate color reproduction like on an Elk, aperture - everything is there to be able to make a good shot. All images without processing were taken with this glass at 500D can be viewed here http://fotki. . Ru/users/lelik-177/

Pros
  • COLOR RENDERING! Running FR Aperture
Cons
  • The lens hood could have been put in the kit for such loot.

Revainrating 5 out of 5

A wonderful product, it's nice to use.

I believe that the lens is not designated as L for marketing reasons and belonging to the EF-S line of lenses. Everything else here is at the highest level: both optical quality, and quality, and ease of use. In general, the combination of a good crop camera and this lens looks quite good compared to a full-frame camera and a Canon EF 24-70 / 2.8L II USM: 1. Significantly lower price of the kit. Slightly less weight. 2. Excellent optical quality. Both sharpness and color reproduction. 3. FR…

Pros
  • 1. Excellent sharpness over the entire range of focal lengths, even for the latest cameras with a high resolution matrix. 2. High aperture throughout the entire range of focal lengths. Allows you to use bokeh at 55mm. Bokeh, of course, not amazing level, but working. 3. High light transmission, excellent color reproduction. It's palpable. 4. Acceptable level of geometric distortions, they are easy to correct. Reasonable level of vignetting (visibly manifests itself primarily at an open aperture in the wide-angle zoom position). 5. Fast and silent focusing due to a full-fledged ring USM. Focusing is internal - nothing extends, does not spin. Suitable for polarizing filters. 6. Constant possibility of fine-tuning focus due to FTM. 7. Excellent stabilizer. 8. For such delicious characteristics - a nice price. 9. Durable plastic housing for L-level lenses. There is no less metal. :) 10. Significantly better than third-party counterparts.
Cons
  • 1. Dimensions rather big. Almost the same as the Canon EF 24-70 / 2.8L II USM. And the mass is only 150 g less and is 650 g. Noticeably more than most crop lenses. Looks disproportionate on xxxD and xxxxD cameras. Well balanced with xxD and xD cameras. But this is a matter of habit. Similar full-frame lenses even more 2. When zooming, it changes dimensions - the front group of lenses extends. Potential place for loosening and suction of dust. But I have seen rentals with obvious signs of noticeable use, and all were without problems with dust and without looseness. 3. The lens hood is stupid and only works for wide angle. I don't see the point in it. However, this is determined by the zoom design of the lens. There's nothing to be done here, Canon EF 24-70 / 2.8L USM (first version) was unique in its kind.

Revainrating 4 out of 5

The goods are normal, money is not wasted!

This lens produces a really excellent picture, comparable in quality to similar professional lenses. But, unreliable, plastic case spoils everything. After some time of active use, the trunk loosens and leaves. As a result, the accuracy of autofocus starts to walk, misses happen. Sucks up dust. Several times I disassembled it myself, tightened the screws, cleaned it from dust. The greedy firm Canon is hesitant to put a lens hood in the kit, despite its high price. I had to buy separately. In…

Pros
  • Excellent image quality, comparable to professional L-class lenses. The most popular range of focal lengths. Practically indispensable for cropped DSLRs. The presence of an image stabilizer. High luminosity.
Cons
  • Unreliable plastic case. No hood included. High price (however, recently it has decreased to a more adequate one).

Revainrating 4 out of 5

Good product, good quality, not bad.

I tried before this sigma, tamrons with similar focal lengths. Everyone had their shortcomings, but there was no money for this lens. The only thing that was pleasing was the presence of a canon 50mm / 1.4, which worked quickly, hit accurately and produced an excellent sharp picture. I decided and sold all the lenses at once. This one waited 3 weeks (they ended abruptly in all warehouses). Finally, I waited for him and the first thing that surprised me was his size and weight for such focal…

Pros
  • Aperture Cutting Focus speed Stabilizer
Cons
  • THE WEIGHT!

Revainrating 5 out of 5

The perfect purchase for me, exactly what I was looking for!

Perhaps this is the best reporting glass for crop in its range of focal lengths. An amateur will come in as the only lens. Perfectly complemented by 24-105 4L. Personally, I got a very sharp and accurate copy, which is a pleasure to shoot if you do not take into account the concern for the nuances of the vacuum cleaner. If you clearly understand why you need this lens + you do not plan to leave the crop in the coming year - take it and think about it. If you are mediocre about photography and…

Pros
  • On my instance: - very sharp in the range of 35-55mm; - complete absence of misses; - really working 2.8 at all focal lengths; - complete absence of chromium in all lighting conditions - this is the first lens on which I saw that this happens; - complete absence of vignetting - which is also unique for zoom; - not a bad USM, not super smart, but decent; - sane stub. Allows you to remove static from your hands at shutter speeds of 1 / 5-1 / 15
Cons
  • Constructive (standard jambs of the proboscis family): - vacuums well - the trunk, like on all glasses of a similar design, wonderfully leaves spontaneously. You just have to come to terms with this. It would not hurt to make a latch in the extreme position for transportation; Picture: - soapy at a wide angle, but again soap only compared to the razor sharpness of the far end. Compared to other zooms, it is not bad even in its soap; - bokeh pattern, if we talk about zooms - it is conditionally satisfactory, when compared with fixes, then the most appropriate word is "blur". No more. A subjective disadvantage because it does not require aesthetics;

Revainrating 5 out of 5

Perfect product for any user!

I would especially like to note the sharpness - this is magic. I ordered in an online store and was afraid for the quality, but a beautiful copy came. You need it if you like to use natural light. Read reviews on analogues - if you are sure that you will see the difference - do not hesitate to buy - it's worth it. Better yet, find a person in the city who has this lens - half an hour of communication with the lens and you won’t want to take anything else)

Pros
  • - sharpness - aperture (f2.8) - nimble - stabilizer
Cons
  • - price - a vacuum cleaner - no hood

Revainrating 4 out of 5

It was a reasonable purchase, I will order more.

In general, an excellent lens, given its direct purpose - a crop camera. In terms of image quality on the crop, it is comparable to L-series lenses. It's a pity that they saved on dust and moisture protection properties. Canon also regretted a piece of plastic in the form of a lens hood. Here it is modern marketing in all its glory - if you want everything in the highest class - take L. Over time, at full zoom, 55 mm is not clearly fixed, thus. you need to hold the zoom ring while shooting. The

Pros
  • Great lens for your money! Constant aperture over the entire range of focal lengths Sharp from f / 4, although at 2.8 it is quite working, but such an aperture is needed only for portraits at full zoom. Good build quality, materials. Fast autofocus.
Cons
  • A little inconvenient in size and location of the manual focus ring. The angle of travel is also small, making precise manual focus difficult. The absence of a sealing gum on the bayonet ring could have been added like on the L series. Because of this, there is a little backlash on the camera, this is not the case with the L series. No hood included. Leak proof construction.