Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Equipment Talk' section > Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 18th of March 2010 (Thu)   #1
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 24,332
Default 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

Looking at the photozone 15-85 and 17-85 tests on the 50D, I can't help but feel like the differences have been a bit overhyped. Judging from posts on this forum, the 17-85 is worse than the 18-55 kit lens and the 15-85 is practically L grade. However judging from these reviews, the 17-85 really doesn't seem much worse at all. It only loses on the wide end at the extreme corners, and at the telephoto end it actually beats the 15-85. Distortion is slightly better for the 15-85 at the wide end, but still not admirable, but vignetting is worse. CA is about the only category where the 15-85 really pulls ahead, but is still not great at wide angle.

Am I missing something here? Is the 15-85 overhyped, or is the 17-85 really not as bad as people like to say?

photozone reviews:
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/40...is_50d?start=1

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/46...3556is?start=1
__________________
Taylor
Galleries: Flickr
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

Last edited by tkbslc : 18th of March 2010 (Thu) at 14:22.
tkbslc is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 18th of March 2010 (Thu)   #2
mrkgoo
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,288
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

Who said the 17-85 was really bad?
mrkgoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of March 2010 (Thu)   #3
Sdiver2489
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,658
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

That's a pretty significant jump in resolution. The distortion measurement is better AND it's significantly wider. 15mm is nothing to scoff at.

That, and the build quality improved and the IS improved. Seems, like a significant upgrade to me.
__________________
Please visit my Flickr and leave a comment!

Gear:
Canon 7D, Canon 70-300L F4-F5.6, Canon 100mm F2.8L Macro, Canon 17-55mm F2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4, Canon 430EX II, Canon 580EX II
Sdiver2489 is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 18th of March 2010 (Thu)   #4
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 24,332
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdiver2489 View Post
That's a pretty significant jump in resolution. The distortion measurement is better AND it's significantly wider. 15mm is nothing to scoff at.

That, and the build quality improved and the IS improved. Seems, like a significant upgrade to me.
Where has the resolution been improved, other than the extreme corners? The 17-85 actually has the highest max center resolution at every focal length.

Not saying the 15-85 isn't better, but it certainly isn't embarassing the 17-85
__________________
Taylor
Galleries: Flickr
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s
tkbslc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of March 2010 (Thu)   #5
Beachcomber Joe
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Southwest Florida
Posts: 458
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkbslc View Post
Am I missing something here? Is the 15-85 overhyped, or is the 17-85 really not as bad as people like to say?
Yes to both questions. The 17-85 has always been one of those lenses that some posters like to bash, mostly those who have never owned one. In the real world, I find my copy of the 17-85 to be just fine, a great walk around lens.
Beachcomber Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of March 2010 (Thu)   #6
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
 
Invertalon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 6,345
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

My 17-85 was great.... The girlfriend is using it now

Extremely sharp on the long end and just fine on the wide. Never had an issue with it!
__________________
Flickr
Invertalon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of March 2010 (Thu)   #7
FuturamaJSP
Senior Member
 
FuturamaJSP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,880
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

Have to agree with Invertalon here.
I also had a 17-85 and I loved it the only thing I hated about it is it's narrow aperture and a bit soft wide open at 85mm but judging from the reviews I have read the newer version hasn't really improved much on those areas either and certainly not worth the extra 350 bucks
FuturamaJSP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of March 2010 (Thu)   #8
toxic
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 3,498
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

There is more to perceived IQ than just test chart resolution figures. Photozone's tests measure resolution, not contrast or acutance. SLRGear is better in this regard, since their blur measurements include both resolution and acutance.

Also, the 1% less distortion is significant, and especially so because the 15-85 is wider.
toxic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of March 2010 (Thu)   #9
borism
Goldmember
 
borism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida, Weston
Posts: 3,375
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

The two issues the 17-85 are distortion at the wide end And unjustified bashing from people that probably haven't even used it ever and enjoy repeating what they once read.
The 17-85 is a nice lens very competent lens.
Having said that. The 15-85 is a newer better suited lens with less distortion at a wider end and sharper corners. Nicer IS and build and yes is sharper wide open With nicer colors and contrast IMO.
It basically is what the 17-85 should have been from the begining.
I really enjoy this lens.
But again the 17-85 is a very competent lens IMO.
__________________
Nikon D600 some zooms some primes a couple of flashes and a Canon G15

Last edited by borism : 19th of March 2010 (Fri) at 14:43.
borism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th of March 2010 (Thu)   #10
eelnoraa
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,558
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

The difference has been overblown out of proportion. 17-85IS isn't a bad lens at all, I have owned one before for 2 years. Actually for crop body, I prefer this lens much over the 17-40L. I even prefer this over 24-105L. And now I have FF, this lens was sold
__________________
5Di, 5Diii, 28, 50, 85, 16-35II, 24-105, 70-200F2.8 IS
eelnoraa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2010 (Fri)   #11
bongEstrella
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mechanicsburg, PA
Posts: 602
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

Juza Nature Photography reviewed this lens and compared it to 17-85 and sigma 18-125..

http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...gma_18-125.htm
bongEstrella is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2010 (Fri)   #12
Sharpmaxell
Member
 
Sharpmaxell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 842
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

i just got my 17-85 yesterday and i like it already. i havent used it that much yet but it seems pretty sharp with a fast focus.
__________________
Gripped 50D | ∑ 17-70 f2.8-4 OS HSM | 55-250 f4-5.6 IS | 50 f1.8 mk I | 430EX II
Sharpmaxell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2010 (Fri)   #13
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 24,332
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bongEstrella View Post
Juza Nature Photography reviewed this lens and compared it to 17-85 and sigma 18-125..

http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...gma_18-125.htm
Nice, thanks. It seems he might agree with me

From Juza:

Quote:
The new Canon 15-85 is a great zoom; it improves both image and built quality in comparison with its predecessor. Is it worth the price? Personally, I think it is a bit overpriced...$ 720 is a lot for a 3.5-5.6 zoom, in spite of the good quality. That said, I expect the price to come down with time, and overall I like this lens. If you have a limited budget and you want something similar, don't forget the old Canon 17-85 - it is much cheaper and it comes close to the quality of 15-85!
So while the 15-85 is better, the 17-85 was not that bad and the 17-85 is better on the long end while the 15-85 is better at the wide end.
__________________
Taylor
Galleries: Flickr
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s
tkbslc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2010 (Fri)   #14
msowsun
Cream of the Crop
 
msowsun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakville Ont. Canada
Posts: 8,268
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkbslc View Post
From Juza:

So while the 15-85 is better, the 17-85 was not that bad and the 17-85 is better on the long end while the 15-85 is better at the wide end.
I disagree with that statement. Where in Juza's review did you see it?

The 15-85 is not overhyped. It is sharp wide open at all focal lengths. The 17-85 is sharp once you stop down, but not wide open.

Check out these SLR Gear charts:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zprod...56/tloader.htm

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zprod...is/tloader.htm
__________________
Mike Sowsun / S110 / G1x / SL1 / 5D Mk III / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 18-135mm STM / EF-S 55-250mm STM
___________/ EF 100mm 2.8 Macro USM / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF Extender 1.4x II /
Full Current and Previously Owned Gear List over 40 years Flickr Photostream

Last edited by msowsun : 19th of March 2010 (Fri) at 12:33.
msowsun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th of March 2010 (Fri)   #15
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 24,332
Default Re: 17-85 vs 15-85 - overhyped?

Quote:
Originally Posted by msowsun View Post
No, the 15-85 is not overhyped. It is sharp wide open at all focal lengths. The 17-85 is sharp once you stop down, but not wide open.

Check out these SLR Gear charts:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zprod...56/tloader.htm

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zprod...is/tloader.htm
I have seen those links, but they don't seem to match up with photozone, the Juzaphoto test linked above, or the real world samples you see. So who do you beleive?

Not trying to be difficult, but really trying to decide if the 15-85 is worth the relatively high price over a 17-85 kit resale in the $300 range.
__________________
Taylor
Galleries: Flickr
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

Last edited by tkbslc : 19th of March 2010 (Fri) at 12:38.
tkbslc is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
L Series Build Overhyped? Colors Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 128 30th of August 2009 (Sun) 10:07


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:06.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.