Canon 17-55 f2.8 lens shadow.

[williamsquire]

<p>Ok,</p>

<p>I bought a Canon 17-55 f2.8 lens and I am playing around with ti to see if I like it. First thing I noticed that when at 17mm and using the built in flash I get a lens shadow at the bottom of the image. If I zoom in a bit the shadow is obviously cropped.<br>

What are my choices? I have a good feeling that 100% of you will say "buy a external flash." But I just dropped $1200 on the lens and don't want to have to fork out $300+ for a flash just yet. Any other options though? Should I just shoot around the problem for now.<br>

Thanks again!</p>

<p>Squire</p>

[jim_j2]

<p>William . . . I think you've answered your own question!<br>

Yes, the shadow at the bottom of the image is usually due to the onboard flash. Most noticable at the shorter focal lengths.</p>

<p>Have you looked into some used external flashes? I know, not a favorable recomendation, but something to consider while "you're shooting around the problem for now!"</p>

[daniel flather]

<p>Buy an external flash.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>I use the 17-55 with a 7D and rarely notice a lens shadow unless shooting white walls at close range. As you noted you can zoom a little and the vignette disappears. Also it disappears at greater distances. Realize the typical use of the popup is for fill on a subject and the edges usually look better with a little vignette.</p>

<p>Here I'm shooting at the wide end and using the popup for fill on the street at night in Chinatown. You can see the darkening of the frame at the bottom but no biggie.</p>

<p><img src="http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/frary/toolbox_images/Seil_0423s.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="427" /></p>

[matthijs]

<p>Did you use the hood? That could account for a little extra shadowing...</p>

<p>(zooming in or cropping will of course help too but that's probably not an option.)</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>The hood is a friggen sombrero and vignettes the popup bigtime.</p>

[mbkissel]

<p>The obvious choice is to get an external flash. I know you don't want to hear that, but the pop up flash just doesn't rise high enough to get a shadow free image when shooting close in. The alternative is to use available light. It's such a nice lens (and yes, it's expensive), why not make yourself happy and spring for a good flash. Adorama has the 430EX II for $250.00.</p>

[ken schwarz]

<p>Yup, it's a real problem that made the 30D's built-in flash as useful as I had expected when I used it with the 17-55. Removing the hood helps a lot. Another trick is to shoot upside-down, so that the remaining shadow is less obtrusive. Direct flash is pretty ugly no matter what you do, though. One gizmo I have seen advertised but have not tried is a miniature reflector which directs the pop-up flash light up so that it bounces off the ceiling. It may be worth a try.</p>

[steve_dunn2]

<p>You'll get that problem with any fairly large lens and the pop-up flash. I've just been rediscovering this, since I'm starting to use the 7D's ability to use its pop-up flash both to control an off-camera flash and to provide a bit of fill (I'd previously used a shoemount flash unit almost exclusively for the last decade or so). Most of the time, as long as I don't have the hood on the lens (not only for lenses the size of the 17-55 or 24-105, but even for the 50/1.4), I don't get a shadow, but at some combinations of focal length and subject distance, the shadow is unavoidable with a pop-up flash.</p>

 

<p>If you aren't prepared to spend the money for a 430EX II yet, look for a used EX flash in the 300 or 400 series. They aren't as capable as the 430EX II (and that's particularly true of the old 380EX and 420EX), but even the least capable of them will do everything the pop-up flash does, and then some: more power, no lens shadow, no red-eye, high-speed sync, and in at least some cases you can bounce the flash. If you get a 420EX or higher, and then later supplement it with a 500-series flash, the 400-series flash can be redeployed as an off-camera slave flash (the 380EX predates this system).</p>

 

<p>There's also the 270EX (or its predecessor, the 220EX). Much less capable than even a 380EX, but also smaller and lighter. The current model (the 270EX) is cheaper than the current mid-range model (the 430EX II) and may even be cheaper than some used mid-range models; the discontinued 220EX is probably cheaper than any of the used mid-range models, though I'm just guessing on that one.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>A used 220EX demands a surprisingly high price. I recently saw new/old stock at a local CVS for $175! All those damn 5D/5Dii owners wanting a pocket flash inflated the price. It's actually a great little flash for off the hip shooting and even has near IR AF assist, unlike the 270EX. Although I have several larger and much heavier EX units, the 220EX loaded with ultra light lithium AAs tends to be in my bag the most.</p>