Dust problem on Canon 17-55 2.8 IS

I wrote a review very positive some weeks ago on Fred Miranda, but i have to

add a remark, ad you guess what about... About dust inside !

 

I don't want to rewrite my review, and I agree in all with the FM review

of "perspective", so just add my experience about this dust vacuum cleaner...

 

I never experienced that on a Canon lens, even the worses... Dust came inside

after about two weeks of use in non-dusty (at all) conditions.

I prefer not imagine what it will happen in dusty conditions.

 

It is clear now with all the reviews on this problem that it is not because of

a bad copy. It is a problem of conception and sealing.

Some people said imprudently there is no difference with the L lenses, sorry,

but for sure, here, there is.

 

Don't send it back to the seller for an exchange, you will get exacly the same

problem with the new copy.

 

There is no only dust, but it seems little withe artifacts too on the internal

lens.

 

I showed the lens at the Canon agreed repair store in Paris (Vilma) and for

them, "it is not a problem"... because we can't see the dust on the pictures...

Not covered by the guarantee, and 80 USD for clean that with 2 weeks of

immobilisation...

Incredible... an unacceptable for a lens at this price.

 

It is a real and very serious problem, and my conclusions are for sure

as "perspective" says, Canon has to re-engineer and fix this problem, so it

will take time, not sure of the results, and no other solution in this range if

you need a Canon quality image, and the IS.

 

Canon must give an answer and some explanations to the customers about that, if

they don't want to see the selling curves of this zoom coming down very fast,

and managing the bad feedbacks of the customers.

 

for the moment, I keep it, because I need all the other features, and I am

satisfied with the image quality. Real a great confort in walkaround ad

reportage use, outside and inside.

 

pics and samples of my first review (completed) are here on Pbase :

http://www.pbase.com/isogood/canon_17_55

 

I don't shoot the dust, you know what it is.

 

I know we are the first buyers of this zoom (I waited for a long time) and like

we said in french we must "essuyer les plâtres", that's to say, be beta-

testers, and discover the problems in daly use.

So we take a risk, and we know that, we have to assume it, but Canon must

assume too and give an answer, or at least, offer a free first cleaning for the

first buyers.

If the dust is only in the lens, I can't see the problem. I had several L lenses and all have dust in them. Not seen in the picture, no worries.

 

http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html#dust

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

When buying the 70-200/4L, I found dust in every one the store had in stock. It's a fact of life, even in the "L" series. The bottom line is that lens dust is a non-issue which has no impact on anything but the owner's peace of mind.

I had dust in my non-L Canon lenses too: tons of it. I have stopped using non-L lenses and am happy to say that both my L lenses (17-40 4L and 24-70 2.8L) are dustfree even after many months of dragging them all ov erthe world (just got back from Israel, for instance).

 

Dust does not matter image-wise, but it sure looks horrible, I absolutely agree.

>> just got back from Israel, for instance

 

Pity I hear about it only now. We could have met and go out shooting together..... :-(

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

I own 3 L zooms and two non-L primes, and I refuse to even look into them for dust. What's the point? It doesn't affect my images in the slightest, and any such discovery would only make me wish it weren't there.

 

If I did look and found dust, I could go to the expense and hassle and time to have them cleaned, but the dust would just come back over time, I'd run the risk of my lenses not performing as well as before the cleaning, and it *still* wouldn't have any impact on my images.

Yakim,

<p>

>>> just got back from Israel, for instance

<p>

<i>Pity I hear about it only now. We could have met and go out shooting together.....</i><p>

 

Indeed a pity. We had a fantastic time in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and Eilat, with trips to Haifa, Mt Carmel, Jaffa, Caesarea, and even Petra (Jordan). Photography was a tad problematic with a family in tow (or rather, ME in tow, being egged on to hurry all the time), but I still managed some acceptable work. Now I want to go back!

<p>

Shalom<Br>

Michael<p>

If and when you do, drop me a line.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

I took the EF-S 17-55 mm f2.8 lens for 16 days with me to Africa under the worst dust condition that I have experienced (I've been in several dust storms in Australia and it's nothing compared to the very fine road dust in East Africa). I have no problems with the results I got from this lens. I even found very fine dust that got in between the protective filter and the front element of the lens, but a good blast of air fixed the problem. Nothing inside the lens as far as I can see.

Are you going to cry about dust on your camera too?

<p>These were taken with a cleaned sensor, clean front and back elements on the lens as far as i could tell and no filters. Maybe it's my cleaning..

</p><p>

One taken at f22, one at f2.8 dust marks are most visible in the sky above and on the far left.

</p><p>

They are unprocessed other than some cusory RAW exposure etc I did on them before i noticed this.

</p><p>

Rog

</p><p>

<img src="http://www.roger.goldsbrough.co.uk/photonet/f2.8.jpg">

</p><p>

<img src="http://www.roger.goldsbrough.co.uk/photonet/f22.jpg">

</p>