Canon EF-S 17-85 IS USM lens £249.99 @ RGB - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
199Expired

Canon EF-S 17-85 IS USM lens £249.00.99 @ RGB

Goose74 Avatar
6y, 7m agoFound 6 years, 7 months ago
Exceptional zoom range for all EF-S mount bodies
Superb image quality
Lightweight and compact
Image Stabilizer - up to 3 stops compensation
Fast near-silent USM AF
Super Spectra coatings
Circular aperture

The EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM provides an effective focal length range of approximately 27-136mm in 35mm format. This provides plenty of framing options, making it the perfect all-purpose lens that allows you to express your creativity in a vast range of shooting situations.

Light and fast

This is the cheapest I have seen this lens.
Deal Tags:
More From RGB Photo:
×
Get the Hottest Deals Daily
Stay informed. Once a day, we'll send you the deals our members voted as the best.
Failed
Goose74 Avatar
6y, 7m agoFound 6 years, 7 months ago
Options

All Comments

(36) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
Great lens voted hot.
#2
have some hot
#3
Was playing with this on my friends D50 earlier tonight (he's a semi-pro photographer) - cracking lens. I've no knowledge about RGB as a retailer though so I won't vote hot or cold.
#4
Lovely lens.
#5
In case it may matter to someone, this is a lens taken from a camera kit, so most likely will not have any Canon packaging...

Good price! :thumbsup:
#6
Will this lens be good with a 7D?
#7
dnc316
Will this lens be good with a 7D?


Yes it will work with 7D as the camera takes EF-S lenses.

Rep. a comment above, the 17-85mm f/4-5.6 is the kit lens of the 40D.
#8
It was an optional kit lens on the 450D as well I believe
banned#9
It's the basic kit lens you get with the 40d, I think canon are trying phase this model out as prices have been dropping for a while now. Not a bad lens though just don't expect L lens quality.
#10
Covers really useful distance, pretty decent at mid to wide end - though this is no L-quality lens afterall, beside the optical quality is quite a bit inferior to the newer 15-85mm, this is reflected in the price. This has been around for a while, halve the pricetag of the newer model is only natural. Having said so, unless your intend to pixel peep, or do very large print you'd be hard pushed to find difference between this, and newer lens.

At this price pairing it with a nice kit, use it well then your bound to get outstanding images. :roll:

Edit:

review of this:
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/402-canon_1785_456is_50d?start=1

review of 15-85:
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/465-canon_1585_3556is?start=1
#11
dnc316
Will this lens be good with a 7D?


Yes, but it would be a bit of a quality mis-match.

Better to spend more on a lens (eg 24-105mm L) and less on a camera (eg 550D).
#12
Voted hot from me
#13
dnc316
Will this lens be good with a 7D?


no, its a waste of the 7D's sensor. you don't want to spend that much on the body and put this lens on it.,

this lens is good for the older Canon's

for the 7D, in this range, you need canon 15-85mm, sigma 17-70mm OS or tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC
#14
Not a very good lens ... the Canon 18-55mm IS still get better reviews ... and if u have to have one , go 2nd hand ...
#15
Would have to disagree with you this lens is solid as a walk around. I have been using this for 2 years on a 40d and have just upgraded to a 7d which it performs well with. Pound for pound this is a great general use lens.
#16
This lens is quite a bit better than the 18-55 IS kit lens. But you will notice the lens distortion on the wide end, it is quite bad to be honest, you can remove it in post processing but some people like a nice pic out of the camera.

This is a good price, they have shot up over the last few months.
#17
Really not a good bit of glass. Get yourself a Sigma 17-70 over this.
#18
user name
Really not a good bit of glass. Get yourself a Sigma 17-70 over this.


LMAO - If you like post processing, get the sigma 17-70

Colour definition is pants compared to the Canon (I have owned both lenses) (a few times lol)
#19
4 - 5.6 eugh.
#20
colonel
no, its a waste of the 7D's sensor. you don't want to spend that much on the body and put this lens on it.,

this lens is good for the older Canon's

for the 7D, in this range, you need canon 15-85mm, sigma 17-70mm OS or tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC


Is this some sort of a joke?
To get decent results quality of the lens should be superior to quality of the camera.
17-70 is Sigma's direct competitor of Canon lens, Tamron is of better optical quality and faster (constatnt f2.8 aperture).
It's a walkaround lens for those who would like to replace cheap kit lens (18-55) with something with better focal lenght range and build quality.

This lens is taken from a camera kit, so may not arrive with a standard Canon produced box or contents. If you wish to have more details before ordering, please call.

Butchering camera kits for a better profit?
#21
aircanman
LMAO - If you like post processing, get the sigma 17-70

Colour definition is pants compared to the Canon (I have owned both lenses) (a few times lol)


Must have had a dodgy copy as the 17-70 was a great lens when I had it.

Of course, I'd recommend a 24-105L but in the price range of someone wanting to spend £250 on a walkaround lens, then I'd stear clear of this one.
#22
Mediocre glass. Of course it'll provide nice sharp images stopped-down to f/8 or above, but did you buy that 7D to shoot at f/8 or narrower? I hope not. If you've picked up a great deal on an older canon body on ebay and just need a walkaround lens to get you started, then this'll do the job.

Otherwise, use what you've got until you know what you need.
#23
out of stock
#24
If you already have the 18-55mm IS I wouldn't bother paying a premium for one of these, about the only advantage this has over the 18-55mm IS is the build quality and improved range. Keep an eye out for the 28-105mm 2.8-3.5, don't confuse this with the newer 28-105mm which lacks the quality and is slower at 4-5.6. It has the same build quality as the 17-85mm, also has full ring type USM, but is slightly faster, sharper and provides slightly better colour reproduction. The only thing it lacks is the IS, which is no great loss unless you shoot under poor lighting conditions often.

For the same money as the 17-85mm, you could put together a kit which easily beats the 17-85mm in virtually all departments. 28-105mm around £100 used, 18-55mm IS around £80 new, 50mm 1.8 around £70 new, total £250:)

You also have they advantage of two of these lenses being EF mount, so if you upgrade bodies to a larger format in the future, they can still be used with your new camera.

Just my two cents, but hopefully it helps someone out
#25
aircanman
LMAO - If you like post processing, get the sigma 17-70

Colour definition is pants compared to the Canon (I have owned both lenses) (a few times lol)


Utter L-glass snobbery crap there :roll:

The Sigma 17-70 is a fine lens, a view supported by EVERY review and I can vouch for it as a great everyday lens. What people like you need to realise is that DSLRs have come down in price so that us mere mortals can afford them as an alternative to a decent compact (I know that must hurt you, you probably want to cry when you see oiks like me wandering round places with my kit, does it errode your self-importance???). We do not however, necessarily need every shot to be an award winner, and some of us, are you ready for this..... actually use them to take..... SNAPS!!! :roll: LOL at all the camera snobs poo-pooing any lens posted on here that does not have their beloved "L" and associated £1000+ price hike of course!! Sheeesh, grow up for gods sake!!
#26
the new sigma 17-70 OS HSM looks to be quite a bit better than the old model. 2.8-4 as well as opposed to 2.8-4.5

Can be had for just over £300

This canon lens isn't as sharp as the 18-55 IS at the wide end, bad CA and distortion. It's better in every other way though.
#27
SaltyCDogg
the new sigma 17-70 OS HSM looks to be quite a bit better than the old model. 2.8-4 as well as opposed to 2.8-4.5

Can be had for just over £300

This canon lens isn't as sharp as the 18-55 IS at the wide end, bad CA and distortion. It's better in every other way though.


For £149 brand new Im not going to whinge about my 17-70 non-HSM :thumbsup:

My personal opinion is that anyone who is looking at a lens like this (and any sub £500 lens really) is not a pro and therefor would not notice most of the problems the so called "experts" on here are spouting about. Thats what gets my goat, the same goes for audio etc, some will say that a £200 home theatre system is pants but to 99% of others it would be perfectly fine!! People on here just need to consider that some people take photos as a record for sentiment etc its not going to be hung on the wall of some poncy art gallery!!

To re-iterate, anyone wanting to upgrade their kit lens without selling a kidney, this is a nice little lens, don't be put off by the multitude of lens snobs this site has who just use threads like this to brag about how good their kit is!!!
#28
was that rant directed at me or the world in general?

where can i get the 17-70 for £150? Cheapest I can see it is £240, the new version is £70 more and looks to be well worth the extra. You get image stabilisation, HSM, slightly faster at the tele end and it's appears to be optically superior (albeit a little bigger and heavier).

It's a good compromise between the flawed Canon 17-85 and the expensive 15-85.
#29
SaltyCDogg
was that rant directed at me or the world in general?

where can i get the 17-70 for £150? Cheapest I can see it is £240, the new version is £70 more and looks to be well worth the extra. You get image stabilisation, HSM, slightly faster at the tele end and it's appears to be optically superior (albeit a little bigger and heavier).

It's a good compromise between the flawed Canon 17-85 and the expensive 15-85.


Nah, you weren't being snobbish were you? :thumbsup: I got the 17-70 from Jessops last year when they were clearing their Sigma stock (I heard at the time that they had fallen out with Sigma and were going to be Tamrom specialists?!?). I bought it for £249 which was a great price at the time, so I posted it here...... someone replied to say that they had just bought it from Jessops for £149 :x Called the branch and they agreed to refund me the difference, I was well chuffed!!!! :-D
#30
frakison
Nah, you weren't being snobbish were you? :thumbsup: I got the 17-70 from Jessops last year when they were clearing their Sigma stock (I heard at the time that they had fallen out with Sigma and were going to be Tamrom specialists?!?). I bought it for £249 which was a great price at the time, so I posted it here...... someone replied to say that they had just bought it from Jessops for £149 :x Called the branch and they agreed to refund me the difference, I was well chuffed!!!! :-D


Loving the rant btw, I did not for one minute say I was a L glass user, yes I have owned a couple of L lenses, but to be honest, with the type of photography I do I dont use them.

While the Sigma lens has very good reviews, on a personal level, (I have had 2 copies of that lens) - I have found its colour reproduction to be less vivid compared to a canon equivalent. Plus there is no point having the f2.8 when its only at 17mm. Plus the lens needs quite alot of light.

You get what you pay for, this is better than the 17-70 though.
#31
danielu2501
Is this some sort of a joke?
To get decent results quality of the lens should be superior to quality of the camera.
17-70 is Sigma's direct competitor of Canon lens, Tamron is of better optical quality and faster (constatnt f2.8 aperture).
It's a walkaround lens for those who would like to replace cheap kit lens (18-55) with something with better focal lenght range and build quality.


Butchering camera kits for a better profit?


no, the new 17-70mm OS has a new ED and a new ALD element over the old non-OS version.
It has vastly better reviews then the canon 17-85mm
17-70mm also has better build quality then 17-85mm
#32
colonel
no, the new 17-70mm OS has a new ED and a new ALD element over the old non-OS version.
It has vastly better reviews then the canon 17-85mm
17-70mm also has better build quality then 17-85mm


I think the main reason the 17-70 gets better reviews is down to its price and the fact that its not a Canon, the main manufacturers always get a hammering because they charge a so called premium.
#33
I disagree. The 15-85 is a relatively expensive canon and gets good reviews. The 17-85 is flawed in a number of ways and gets mediocre reviews.

The good reviews of the 17-70 OS HSM I've read are mostly based on test data. 2.8-4 isn't bad, there are plenty of L lenses that are constant F4.
#34
wombat6025
Was playing with this on my friends D50 earlier tonight (he's a semi-pro photographer) - cracking lens. I've no knowledge about RGB as a retailer though so I won't vote hot or cold.


I bought a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (Nikon fit) off them a few months ago and they are reliable.

.
#35
aircanman
Loving the rant btw, I did not for one minute say I was a L glass user, yes I have owned a couple of L lenses, but to be honest, with the type of photography I do I dont use them.

While the Sigma lens has very good reviews, on a personal level, (I have had 2 copies of that lens) - I have found its colour reproduction to be less vivid compared to a canon equivalent. Plus there is no point having the f2.8 when its only at 17mm. Plus the lens needs quite alot of light.

You get what you pay for, this is better than the 17-70 though.


aircanman
I think the main reason the 17-70 gets better reviews is down to its price and the fact that its not a Canon, the main manufacturers always get a hammering because they charge a so called premium.


You are clearly either in the wrong ball park or just deluded :roll:, if you want perfection of course a lens like this will disappoint.... thats why its cheaper :roll: HOWEVER, for us non-pixel peepers out there, this is a good lens (love your admission to buying 2 of these "crap" lenses LOL!!)
#36
frakison
You are clearly either in the wrong ball park or just deluded :roll:, if you want perfection of course a lens like this will disappoint.... thats why its cheaper :roll: HOWEVER, for us non-pixel peepers out there, this is a good lens (love your admission to buying 2 of these "crap" lenses LOL!!)


I have done a lot of research with both these lenses, and one thing I will say is I am not wrong.

They are good lenses, but not as good as some others.

Someone mentioned the Tamron 17-50 - AMAZING lens I will say, L quality.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!