# New 17-55 coming soon?



## dtravels (Jul 18, 2012)

I'm getting ready to buy a EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM in the next 6 months.

It was first released 2006, making it ~6 years old.

Will this lens be retired any time soon?

It should an equivalent lens I should be buying instead?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 18, 2012)

In another 15 years or so, we might see a successor. 6 years old is still a new model as lenses go.


----------



## Videoshooter (Jul 18, 2012)

Lenses, unlike camera bodies, are made to last. They have much longer production cycles and also retain their value better if you want to sell them.

6 years is not old for a lens. Many of Canon's lenses are up to 20 years old and still popular today (eg 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 35mm f2, 70-200 f/2.8). Of course the cheaper EF-S lenses do get updated more frequently (probably partly because of the consumer mindset that you have to have the latest and greatest!) but the 17-55 is almost on par with Canon's L lenses and as such I think it will be around for a lot longer. 

Even if it does get replaced tomorrow, this lens will still be a fantastic performer so there should be nothing stopping you from buying this lens now if it's what you're looking for.

edit: Does anybody know why f/2.8 is appearing with a smiley in it? I tried to remove it but it's still there...


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 19, 2012)

dtravels said:


> I'm getting ready to buy a EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM in the next 6 months.
> 
> It was first released 2006, making it ~6 years old.
> 
> ...



What wrong with current 17-55? If I ever go back to crop, this will be the 1st lens I buy.


----------



## Axilrod (Jul 19, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> dtravels said:
> 
> 
> > I'm getting ready to buy a EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM in the next 6 months.
> ...



It's an awesome lens in terms of IQ, but the focus ring feels pretty crummy and I've heard lots of people with dust problems.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 19, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > dtravels said:
> ...



Some early production has dust issue - still has no effect in IQ.


----------



## J (Jul 20, 2012)

If anything, the lens feels like it should have an update since the 15-85 got introduced. I would like the range to start at 15 also.


----------



## KyleSTL (Jul 20, 2012)

J said:


> If anything, the lens feels like it should have an update since the 15-85 got introduced. I would like the range to start at 15 also.



I think the 15mm wide end would be a good reason to update this, it was rumored back in Feb 2011 (CR1) that a 15-60mm f/2.8 IS USM was in the works:

http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/02/ef-s-15-60-f2-8-is-cr1/

If this lens was to materialize, I would expect MSRP in the $1500+ range (based on Canon's pricing strategies lately).


----------



## kennephoto (Jul 21, 2012)

17-55 is awesome, mine has dust but so does everything else that exists. Dust cant be avoided ever, but my 17-55 still makes great images with zero visible dust! Oh and no lens creep like my 17-85! Buy a 17-55 if you have crop I dont regret mine.


----------



## ScottyP (Jul 21, 2012)

Mine has zero dust after several thousand clicks. I bought it based on the nearly universal rave reviews, whichrally make it stand out for attention to anyone shopping the net for lenses. It is not made of metal, but it is about as solid as one could make a plastic lens. Not even remotely similar to EF-S kit lenses. I have nothing but high praise for it. 

It is a little expensive, but it holds value very well. The used ones sell for only about $100.00 to at most $150.00 less than I got it new, so I think it will be hard to lose on the deal.


----------



## Act444 (Jul 21, 2012)

I was in the same boat...I was relatively new to CR when I saw the article a year ago about a possible 15-60mm 2.8 coming out and I was totally sucked in...time came by and no announcement- decided I couldn't wait and just bought the current model. Glad I did. A clear step up from the Tamron I was using before.


----------



## dtravels (Jul 22, 2012)

Thanks all -- looks like I'll definitely be buying the 17-55 then. With a new baby on the way, it'll be a fun new toy for me to play with


----------



## AdamJ (Jul 23, 2012)

Videoshooter said:


> Lenses, unlike camera bodies, are made to last. They have much longer production cycles and also retain their value better if you want to sell them.
> 
> 6 years is not old for a lens. Many of Canon's lenses are up to 20 years old and still popular today (eg 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 35mm f2, 70-200 f/2.8). Of course the cheaper EF-S lenses do get updated more frequently (probably partly because of the consumer mindset that you have to have the latest and greatest!) but the 17-55 is almost on par with Canon's L lenses and as such I think it will be around for a lot longer.
> 
> ...



The code for that smiley is an "8" and a ")" typed consecutively. Put a space between them to avoid it.


----------



## Videoshooter (Jul 24, 2012)

Thanks Adam!


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 24, 2012)

i wonder if they will do a 17-55 f2.8IS for the M-mount
and i wonder how much they could shave the size down due to the reduced flange distance
might be interesting and make the new mirrorless beast a bit more of a weapon


----------



## match14 (Aug 1, 2012)

Would be worth doing, Panasonic launched a 12-35 f/2.8 for micro 4/3 which is a 24-70mm equivalent although dof is deeper. Maybe Canon could get away with a 15-45mm f/2.8?


----------



## moreorless (Aug 1, 2012)

Performance wise there doesnt seem to be much need to update it to me.

The main reason for a new version would I'd say be is Canon push a new 7D more up market and they want a professional lens with tougher build and weather sealing to go with it.

If a new version does appear with any significant changes I think you can be pretty much certain the price will rise alot so your not likely to loose out much by buying the lens now.


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Aug 8, 2012)

I had one with a loose zoom assembly. You can imagine who that messed up the photos! It took Canon service three tries to find the problem.

Of course that was partly my fault because I kept telling them that the lens had a front or back focus problem. :-\


----------

