Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM or Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L

Mr Luvpants wrote in post #15695721
One thing though that I am "concerned" about is sharpness. Are both lens on a par?

JOHN

Yes. I had the 15-85mm on my 50D, and now I have a 24-105mm on my 5DII. They're very comparable.

I'd definitely go with the 15-85mm on a 7D, it's an awesome lens that won't disappoint you.

Been doing a bit research and I'm thinking about the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 now as well!

The 15-85 was launched in 2009 at the same time as the 7D and I did read a report which said, this lens had been designed "specifically" for the 7D. I cant find that report at the moment, but if I do, I will post it here.

finaledit wrote in post #15693592
I find I shoot 15mm a lot on my T3i. 24mm is a huge drop in wide view on a crop camera.

Well, I'm not the only one then..

I have a T2i and have been looking to get something with better image quality than the kit lens 18-55.

The other two lenses I currently own are a 50mm/f1.8 and the Canon 55-250mm IS lens (which I'm actually quite happy with, I've been able to get some nice sharp photos with it, so for my purposes for now at least, I feel like i'm happy using it).

I've been looking at the 15-85mm since it is recommended so much and the quality looks great - my question is, do people still recommend it over the new Sigma 17-70mm Contemporary lens?

As a note, I do also think I'm going to try and save for the Canon 10-22m, as I have been frustrated by an inability to really take much in the way of wide angle shots.

zadillo wrote in post #15697915
I have a T2i and have been looking to get something with better image quality than the kit lens 18-55.

The other two lenses I currently own are a 50mm/f1.8 and the Canon 55-250mm IS lens (which I'm actually quite happy with, I've been able to get some nice sharp photos with it, so for my purposes for now at least, I feel like i'm happy using it).

I've been looking at the 15-85mm since it is recommended so much and the quality looks great - my question is, do people still recommend it over the new Sigma 17-70mm Contemporary lens?

As a note, I do also think I'm going to try and save for the Canon 10-22m, as I have been frustrated by an inability to really take much in the way of wide angle shots.

If it fits FF too, then it's a good value.

One vote for the 24-105L. Unless you shoot very wide 24 will work OK on a crop. And I like the fixed f4 over the 15-85. I bought the 10-22 for those rare occasions where I need wider than 24mm. (I did own the 15-85 for a while, really liked it, but just like the 24-105 a bit more.)

And IMHO, 55mm is way too short for a general walkaround lens - I bought the 17-55 because of the 2.8, and returned it within a day. Plus the 17-55 2.8 feels really cheap for a $1000 lens, the 15-85 actually feels better built.

As far as the 24-70 f4 and 24-70 f2.8 II, they are nice but just out of my price range.

jrbdmb wrote in post #15698141
One vote for the 24-105L. Unless you shoot very wide 24 will work OK on a crop. And I like the fixed f4 over the 15-85. I bought the 10-22 for those rare occasions where I need wider than 24mm. (I did own the 15-85 for a while, really liked it, but just like the 24-105 a bit more.)

And IMHO, 55mm is way too short for a general walkaround lens - I bought the 17-55 because of the 2.8, and returned it within a day. Plus the 17-55 2.8 feels really cheap for a $1000 lens, the 15-85 actually feels better built.

As far as the 24-70 f4 and 24-70 f2.8 II, they are nice but just out of my price range.

There is really no right or wrong here, but 24mm is not terribly wide on a crop so what you want it for has to be clearly thought out. And as I mentioned earlier, f/4 is not all that fast, and on the wide end the 15-85 is faster or equal to the 24-105, depending on the focal length. The 15-85 has 4 stops of IS and for photographing static subjects in relatively low light can be very effective at 1/15, 1/10 and even 1/6 second handheld. The 24-105 has the older 3-stop IS system. Of course if the 24-105 were a constant f/2.8 the choice might be a different one and would certainly be much more difficult. Its a choice I had to make myself a year ago. I'm glad I went with the 15-85. I found that a very significant portion of my shots are between 15-24 mm and I rarely wont for a focal length greater then 85mm.

Mr Luvpants wrote in post #15697336
Been doing a bit research and I'm thinking about the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 now as well!

That is also a very fine lens. The choice between it and the 15-85mm is really what you need more -- speed or focal range.

Personally, I owned the 17-55 f/2.8 when I shot crop only. However, I bought the lens a few years before the 15-85mm was released. If both lenses had been available at the time, I probably would have opted for the 15-85mm and supplemented it with a fast prime for those times I needed something faster. That is how I've built my full frame kit (24-105mm f/4 L + primes) and am quite happy with the setup.