Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 22 Apr 2012 (Sunday) 10:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

15-85 vs 24-105

 
uri1411
Hatchling
8 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Apr 22, 2012 10:41 |  #1

What are the differences between those lenses, and does it worth the difference in price?
I am going to use it on the 60d.
Thank you!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
kent ­ andersen
Goldmember
1,071 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Norway, Kristiansand
     
Apr 22, 2012 11:01 |  #2

on a 60D... buy 15-85mm.

It is cheaper, just as sharp, great contrast, and it has the latest IS and an excelent AF.'
The 15-85mm is also having a great macro ability.

15mm is important for my cind of photography. I wouldn't like to be without it. 24mm is just not enough.

Others will probably explain the smaller differences. But my impression is that these two lenses are very much equal in quality.
Those areas where mybe 24-105 is bether is not something you as a new photographer will think about when you walk around and thake shot.
I don't think most pros will bother much eather.

If you are disatisfied with the IQ of 15-85, you will not be satisfied with 24-105 either. Then Prime is the only way to go.

If i buy a 5d, I would definently sell my 15-85 and buy a 24-105 pared with a prime. But as long as I am useing a 60D, 15-85 will be my best friend.


Living in Austria, I am so glad that there is stuff like Gimp out there...
I am a happy giver, so if you find any misspelling in my text, you can keep them... :)
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/41388512@N05/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
michgirl
Goldmember
1,308 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 61
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Michigan
     
Apr 22, 2012 13:45 |  #3

I had the Canon 500D with the 15mm-85mm - absolutely loved it, hated to give it when I went full frame. Now I have the 24mm-105mm on the 5D II and must say, both lens are spectacular when paired with their intended cameras.

For the 60D, go with the 15 - 85.


Robin
Canon 6d / EF Lens: 24mm-105mm / 40mm f/2.8 / 28mm f/1.8 / 50mm f/1.8 / 85mm 1.8
Canon T6i / EFs Lens: 24mm Pancake / 18-55mm STM / 18-135mm STM / 55-250mm STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
uri1411
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
8 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Apr 22, 2012 13:57 |  #4

Oh i swear i meant to write i don't need the 15 on the wide end.. 24 is enough for me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Apr 22, 2012 13:59 |  #5

Main difference is full frame compatibility and zoom range. Optically very similar (that is to say excellent)


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Apr 22, 2012 14:01 |  #6

uri1411 wrote in post #14308906 (external link)
Oh i swear i meant to write i don't need the 15 on the wide end.. 24 is enough for me.

Are you sure? Maybe you don't need 15, but what about 17, 20, 22? You can do a minor crop and get from 85 to 105mm, but you can't uncrop a 24mm to 15. It's almost twice as wide.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AbPho
Goldmember
Avatar
3,165 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 106
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Planet Earth
     
Apr 22, 2012 14:01 as a reply to  @ tkbslc's post |  #7

I had the EF-S 17-85. No where near happy with that lens. I'd put my money on the 24-105 being a better lens.


I'm in Canada. Isn't that weird!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
uri1411
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
8 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Apr 22, 2012 14:13 |  #8

I had the 24-85 but it broke..i wasn't missing the mm in the wide end




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HughR
Senior Member
Avatar
999 posts
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Toronto, Ontario
     
Apr 22, 2012 15:03 |  #9

As stated above, the Canon 15-85 IS is an outstanding lens optically and in terms of IS. It's on my 60D about 90% of the time for the past 1.5 years, and it does a fantastic job. I would never be happy limited to the angle of a 24mm focal length on a crop sensor (38.4 mm equivalent). Finally to AbPho: all evaluations indicate that the 15-85 has much better image quality than the old 17-85. There's no comparison.


Hugh
Canon 60D, Original Digital Rebel (2003)
EFS 15-85mm IS USM, EF 70-300mm IS USM, Tokina 11-16mm
Speedlite 430EX, Speedlite 430EX II,
Qbox 16 pro, Lastolite EZbox 24x24, Lumiquest Softbox III

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lincolnshire ­ Poacher
Member
115 posts
Joined May 2011
Location: Lincolnshire, UK
     
Apr 22, 2012 15:18 |  #10

I use a 15-85 on my crop camera and the 24-105 on my FF. I would defy anyone to tell the difference in IQ without severe pixel peeping.

On a 60D, go for the 15-85 every time.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frugal
Senior Member
Avatar
784 posts
Joined May 2009
Location: Northern CA
     
Apr 22, 2012 16:08 as a reply to  @ Lincolnshire Poacher's post |  #11

On a crop camera the 15-85 is sharp and a very useful range . If at times you want a wider aperture also get a prime.


Richard
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Apr 22, 2012 16:52 |  #12
bannedPermanent ban

michgirl wrote in post #14308863 (external link)
both lens are spectacular when paired with their intended cameras.

tkbslc wrote in post #14308928 (external link)
You can do a minor crop and get from 85 to 105mm, but you can't uncrop a 24mm to 15. It's almost twice as wide.

^^
Crop = 15 - 85 > 24-105.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Judsonzhao
Goldmember
Avatar
1,198 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Dallas, TX
     
Apr 22, 2012 17:11 |  #13

24 is not wide enough on crop, I use it with my t2i
but 24-105 has better build quality, and it can save your money when you go to full frame.
To me 105 make more sense than 15, you can do portrait sports with 105 on a crop.
F4 is another advantage. 24-105 is not expensive by the way, BNIB is below 900


Fly me away.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lungdoc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,101 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2006
Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Canada
     
Apr 22, 2012 17:54 |  #14

AbPho wrote in post #14308931 (external link)
I had the EF-S 17-85. No where near happy with that lens. I'd put my money on the 24-105 being a better lens.

The 15-85, not the the 17-85, is the lens being compared here. The 17-85 isn't in the same league. I had one and replaced it with 15-85. It is night and day in range, IQ and IS vs 17-85. To me versatility is king in a walk around and the wide end is crucial for that especially indoors. Unless you hate the wide end or plan to move to FF soon I'd suggest 15-85.
For the price difference you can also buy a used 28-135 if you need some reach and buy the 15-85.


Mark
My Smugmug (external link) Eos 7D, Canon G1X II, Canon 15-85 IS, Canon 17-85 IS, Sigma 100-300 EX IF HSM, Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 85mm 1.8, Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro, Sigma 50-150 2.8, Sigma 1.4 EX DG , Sigma 24-70 F2.8 DG Macro, Canon EF-S 10-22, Canon 430EX,

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MingTyhMaa
Member
107 posts
Joined Sep 2010
     
Apr 22, 2012 19:28 |  #15

I agree with the 15-85. I read all the forums too and told myself that 24mm was wide enough on a cropped body and probably had some L lust, and ended up buying both, but the 15-85 proved to be the better range and balanced the 60 D better.


Sony A7II + 24-70 f4 + 55 1.8
Sony A6000 + 8mm fish, 10-18, 55-210
Sony RX100III

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,776 views & 0 likes for this thread
15-85 vs 24-105
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is JerryMc
903 guests, 359 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.