Can anyone give a report on using the EF-S 17-55 with the C300?

[Paul Joy]

That's interesting Graham, maybe the extra sensor width is just revealing build tolerances in the production of these lenses that wouldn't normally appear on a 1.6 crop. I can only imagine mine goes a little bit wider if it reveals the edges of the sun hood and yours doesn't.

I'll pop into warehouse express in the week and see if I can try another one.

Paul

[Andy Wilkinson]

This makes me feel even better that I bought a cheap Chinese knock-off lens hood for my Canon 17-55mm! It's a Marumi EW-83J that has a printed code implying it's specifically made for that lens. [It may or may not be exactly the same shape as a Canon one, I don't know].

If I ever save enough to get a C300 (and it also gives me any issues on vignetting with my 17-55mm) I'll think nothing of carefully "easing it out" with half-round and rats-tail files at the critical points. File work will be done off-camera of course ;-)

Incidentally, the (genuine) Canon EW-83E hood I have for my Canon 10-22mm has (of course) a much wider spread so that would work just fine - but at the risk of letting a little too much stray light near the front lens element. It's got that lovely light absorbing felt on the inside face which the cheaper Marumi types lack - as indeed do all the other genuine Canon hoods for my longer Canon glass.

I bet Canon make a hood that's somewhere between the two (in shading area and shape) that might work just fine - if some copies of the 17-55mm take it a little too close to the limit like Paul's seems to.

[Richard D. George]

I own the 17-55 and also several L lenses. I agree with the praise for its optical quality but it needs to be said that mechanically it is not L quality build. Depending on the shooting conditions, this could be a factor.

[Richard D. George]

I should clarify that it is the sealing that is my issue with the 17-55, rather than "metal versus plastic" issues. I love my 17-55 from an optical point of view, but I have had to send it to Canon twice for problems with dust getting into the interior of the lens.

[Nigel Barker]

My C300 arrived yesterday so I can confirm that with my EF-S 17-55 there is no vignetting with or without the lens hood. It is the proper Canon model for this lens which as it is currently the one & only EF-S lens I own I was surprised at the time of purchase to discover that I had to pay nearly another £30 for a cheap plastic moulding that must cost all of 10p to manufacture especially as the 17-55mm at around £800 costs as much as some 'L' lenses

[Paul Joy]

That's good to know Nigel, I'm going to nip up to wex this afternoon and see if I can get mine replaced.

Regards

Paul.

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Paul Joy

That's good to know Nigel, I'm going to nip up to wex this afternoon and see if I can get mine replaced.

Regards

Paul.

I'll probably be popping there this afternoon too as I need to pick up a couple of things before the weekend. I have only just realised that you are based not to far away from me (I actually live in Belaugh which is a little village the Norwich side of Wroxham). We should meet up & form a Norfolk C300 owners club:-) I'll mail you my contact details.

[Jen Hook]

The vignetting seems to only be an issue when using the lens hood. I've seen some amazing screen grabs. the 17-55 is great and I to wish they would build an L-version, something like 16-60, one with the weather-proofing and such to the standards of the C300.

[Paul Joy]

I went in to wex and tried another 17-55 today, it was exactly the same, slight vignetting in the corners even without the lens hood. I also tried the two main L series wide zooms and while they had nice images and didn't vignette I missed the IS a lot, enough to make me stick with the 17-55.

There's more info on my blog Canon EFS 17-55 causing vignetting on the C300 | Paul Joy – Freelance Filmmaker

Here's a quick video showing results from the three lenses, in the 17-55 part you can see the vignette moving in the top right corner of the shot.

Wide zoom tests on Canon C300 on Vimeo

[Mark Dobson]

Just wanted to join in the thread and report that I've not experienced any vignetting with the 17-55F 2.8 myself.

This is regardless of Peripheral Illumination Correction being turned on or off.

And no vignetting with a wider lens, the Sigma 10-20mm. Incidentially is Peripheral Illumination not available for 3rd party lenses?.

[Nigel Barker]

I wondered if Paul was a bit more critical & that I hadn't examined my clips so thoroughly but I just quickly shot a white wall at 17mm & examined the image really carefully & cannot see any evidence of vignetting.

I have to wonder if it might be a problem with Paul's camera. This must be a common lens to use on the C300 & I have seen no other reports.

[Jon Fairhurst]

An unlikely (but possible?) cause could be if the hood is installed with a 90 degree twist. I haven't done that, but I've made other boneheaded moves with video at times. :)

[Paul Joy]

Originally Posted by Nigel Barker

I wondered if Paul was a bit more critical & that I hadn't examined my clips so thoroughly but I just quickly shot a white wall at 17mm & examined the image really carefully & cannot see any evidence of vignetting.

I have to wonder if it might be a problem with Paul's camera. This must be a common lens to use on the C300 & I have seen no other reports.

Could well be the camera, although I've heard from two other C300 owners that see the same results so it's not just mine.