canon 17-55 sluggish/jerky zoom

[bradlinton]

<p>Hi all,<br>

I received my 17-55 usm is 2.8 lens today as an upgrade for my 7d. After some quick shooting tests, I find the sharpness, bokeh, and speed of AF to be great. This is what I wanted and expected from this $1100 lens.<br>

What I did not expect was the tight/jerky/sluggish quality of the zooming in and out from 17-55mm. As an example, it zooms fluidly down to about 25mm then seems impeded as it opens to 17mm.<br>

Is this at all normal from a brand new lens? Will it "loosen up" and become more fluid with use? I just want to get some feedback so I can decide if I need to possibly return the lens to BH for a different copy.</p>

<p>Brad Linton<br>

<a href="http://www.thelintonstudio.com">www.thelintonstudio.com</a></p>

 

[don_bryant2]

<p>That sounds odd-weird, I've never noticed that with my 17-55. I'll check mine tonight just to verify.</p>

 

[mbkissel]

<p>Mine does about the same thing. It's not nearly as smooth as any of my L zooms. It does seem to have "loosened" up a bit with use. I don't notice it nearly as much now as when it was new.</p>

[bradlinton]

<p>Donald and Mark,<br>

Thanks for the feedback guys. It makes sense the action of the zoom wont be as smooth as an L and I appreciate the comparison. I'll play with it over the weekend and see if it's just me being a little overcritical. After all, this could fall under the "it's great but not as well built as an L zoom" comments I've already read.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>A lot of copies ship with increased resistance in the middle of the zoom range. Mine loosened up after a couple years and is pretty smooth now. Hopefully it won't become "loose as a goose" like my 28-135 did...</p>

[jennifer_henry]

<p>I rented a copy and didn't notice this until I saw this post. On this particular copy, it is a little bit tight but I would not call it sluggish or jerky. Toward the 55 end this one loosens up.</p>

<p>I did notice it doesn't really seem that much sharper than the kit lens (18-55 IS) to me and the colors are a little better but not that much. I am about to post and ask for opinions on that topic but saw this and got sidetracked. Good luck with it! I am undecided if I will purchase it or not.</p>

[alan_chan4]

<p>Yes it is normal for this zoom and commonly known. Mine was like that too when new.</p>

[bradlinton]

<p>So I've had time to shoot more with this lens over the weekend here, and I've decided the action of the zoom feels more and more like something not to worry about. It gives the impression of really nice, high-quality glass, housed in a comparatively light plastic body. I wouldn't therefor call this a flaw, but rather the quirk of an otherwise great lens based on my results from my very informal tests.</p>

<p>-brad</p>

 

[steve_dunn2]

<p>Mine, which is about a year and a half old, shows a modest difference in force needed to zoom depending on focal length. I don't recall if it was any different when it was brand new. It's nothing I'd really notice if it weren't pointed out to me. (By comparison, the zoom action of my other two zooms, the 24-105/4L IS USM and 70-200/2.8L IS USM, doesn't have this little quirk.)</p>

 

<p>I don't think it's anything to worry about. This lens puts pro-quality glass in a package that's built to a similar standard as Canon's high-end consumer lenses. As it's the glass, not the outer shell, that takes the picture, I'm very happy with it.</p>

[bradlinton]

<p>After nearly a month of use I find the zoom properties to be a non-issue. The glass is top notch, and the action has smoothed.</p>

<p>-brad linton</p>