EF-S Conundrum: 17-55 or 15-85 and Sigma 30 1.4?

First, thanks for opening the thread and reading. I realize these sorts of threads are a dime a dozen.

I'm shooting on a T2i, and though I feel my skills are beginning to yearn for a more advanced body, I'd rather spend the money on glass.

I don't really have a specific subject I focus on and my needs, or more accurately, desires, are: low-light performance, IQ, and reach -- all on a wide zoom.

I'm keen on the 17-55, as it offers wide angle, low-light performance, and the best IQ of the bunch, though it lacks reach and covers the same range of my 18-55 kit lens.

I could pick up the 15-85, which has excellent IQ, and gain the reach but at the expense of low-light performance. That's where the Sigma 30 1.4 comes in, fulfilling that need.

I'm not sure what to do and any advice and/or insight is, of course, greatly appreciated.

jrmy wrote in post #13831553
First, thanks for opening the thread and reading. I realize these sorts of threads are a dime a dozen.

I'm shooting on a T2i, and though I feel my skills are beginning to yearn for a more advanced body, I'd rather spend the money on glass.

I don't really have a specific subject I focus on and my needs, or more accurately, desires, are: low-light performance, IQ, and reach -- all on a wide zoom.

I'm keen on the 17-55, as it offers wide angle, low-light performance, and the best IQ of the bunch, though it lacks reach and covers the same range of my 18-55 kit lens.

I could pick up the 15-85, which has excellent IQ, and gain the reach but at the expense of low-light performance. That's where the Sigma 30 1.4 comes in, fulfilling that need.

I'm not sure what to do and any advice and/or insight is, of course, greatly appreciated.

Tough decision. You require low light performance which pretty much seals it for the 17-55, as with IS you can handhold shots with nothing moving and 2.8 to freeze motion.

But, the 15-85 + 30 gives you a lot more flexiblity. It's wider and longer and faster for when you might need it.

Personally, I'd go for a 15-85 and a flash, and pick up the 30 when you can.

15-85 + speedlight is a very solid suggestion indeed. Learn how to bounce flash and you'll not only have lowlight abilities that nothing can match but it gives you control over your lighting.

Of course you don't always want to use flash and so the Sigma 30 will be nice there.

IS can be handy for low light, but that's assuming you don't have moving subjects. What sort of low light stuff are you thinking of?

phreeky wrote in post #13831736
15-85 + speedlight is a very solid suggestion indeed. Learn how to bounce flash and you'll not only have lowlight abilities that nothing can match but it gives you control over your lighting.

Of course you don't always want to use flash and so the Sigma 30 will be nice there.

IS can be handy for low light, but that's assuming you don't have moving subjects. What sort of low light stuff are you thinking of?

I'd like to be able to capture my 2 and 5 year-old nephews, indoors, occasionally. I do want to learn how to use a Speedlite, but I think I'd be happiest with a capable low-light lens.

What about the 17-50 OS from Sigma and the 30/1.4?

My vote goes for 15-85+speedlite or Sigma 17-50.

Sell what you can to enable you to buy a used 1D2 or a classic 5d

Either of those along with your 50 would transform your photography.

The same could be said for just purchasing the sigma 30 mm

Why no the sigma 17-50 2.8 ? Its $594 ish right now on bh with the $75 rebate.

Depend on what you are shooting...

I got the 15-85 plus 30 1.4 to start. Love the quality of the 15-85 lens. But speed was only good for travel.

Sold the 15-85 because i needed the speed for indoor sports. Got the 17-55 2.8. Still need more speed.

Gonna end up with 30 1.4, 50 1.4, 85 1.4, 135 2.0 and 17-55 2.8, 11-16 2.8 II before I'm done.

I'm gonna add for all those indoor sports shooters - I manually focus about 80% of my shots. The sharps contrast in gyms make focusing very difficult to focus on the subject at hand.

I just went through this same thing and I decided on the 24-105 since I already have 10-20 and 50 1.4. Good luck

I have to 15-85 and the 50 1.8 for low light. I am thinking about getting the 30 1.4 for a wider angle. I like the fact that the 15-85 gives me 2mm more wide and 30mm more long. I use this as my primary lense and am very comfortable with it. I supplement with flash when the light is too low.

I am currently in the same predicament with my t3i. I think I'll be happier with a 15-85 due to the fact that I really want that focal length range and the price and size is smaller than the 17-55's.

jrmy wrote in post #13831921
I'd like to be able to capture my 2 and 5 year-old nephews, indoors, occasionally. I do want to learn how to use a Speedlite, but I think I'd be happiest with a capable low-light lens.

A f2.8 zoom isn't really a 'capable low-light lens' as you might think.

If it's an occasional thing, I agree with others - 15-85 + speedlite such as 430EXII.

2.8 isn't enough for low light at all. You would be better off with the 30 1.4 and 15-85 or 15-85 and speedlite.

Since the 15-85 is so good, if you have any doubts about your choices, I'd suggest your default position should be to go for the greater focal range over the f/2.8 constant.

The 15-85 wasn't available at the time I upgraded. I went from a 17-85 to a 17-55/2.8. In doing so, I realized that I was going with a severe penalty on focal range and so also bought a 70-200/4L IS at the same time. That two lens combination worked well for me, but, it is not light weight.

Now my main single lens setup is a 5D2 with a 24-105. That combination confirmed how much I like the focal range.

As for the 17-55/2.8 IS: I loved this lens. Especially when I couple it with an external flash. But, I knew what I was getting into since I already had a 17-85.