Canon 40D & 17-55/2.8 IS

Curtis Cunningham · #1 10-21-2007, 07:07 PM

I mentioned my desire to buy this setup to another photographer I met this past week, and he cautioned me because of something he heard about the body needing to be "calibrated" with the 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens. The lens he recommended to me was the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM.

For budget reasons, I can really only purchase one lens and I'd like it to be able to perform well in low-light settings, and be a good portraiture lens as well.

Two questions:

Have you heard anything about this "calibration" issue before?
What are the pros and cons of each of the above two lenses?

ChrisPerry · #2 10-21-2007, 07:15 PM

The calibration spiel is nonsense. I have a 17-55 and have used it on a 20D, 30D and now my 40D - it's sharp on all of them and nothing I own has been calibrated or fixed, etc.

The 17-55 (as compared to the 24-105) has one more stop of light AND when you put a 2.8 or faster lens on a canon body extra focusing sensors kick in making if faster and more accurate to focus.

The 24-105 is not as wide (an issue indoors) but longer - great for some things like studio work (IMO - i use my 28-135 in the studio a lot)

It depends on what you shoot - I shoot a lot of weddings, so the 17-55 is great for that. F4 isn't fast enough.

Aaron Winters · #3 10-25-2007, 03:32 PM

There is no need to calibrate the lens/body combo unless something is not working correctly.

I use this combo (40D/17-55 2.8) all the time and I did not have to have anything calibrated when I moved from a 30D to a 40D as my main body.

Paul_Lantz · #4 10-30-2007, 11:42 PM

I don't have the 17-55 but use the 24-105 a lot. It is handy to have the extra range compared to the 24-70 but it is not as useful in dark environments, e.g. dance floors where it can be impossible to get it to focus in situations where an f2.8 lens focusses very quickly.