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 11 May 2014 (Sunday) 01:57
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 15-85mm best affordable lens for landscapes?

 
norski_lab
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
10 posts
Joined May 2014
     
May 13, 2014 16:04 |  #31

Mike55 wrote in post #16902130 (external link)
I'd jump all over that new 10-18, Norski. Not sure when it will be on the shelves though. The MTF looks sharper than the 10-22.

Looks like the ship date is June 6th...That might be my fall purchase! Hopefully someone will post reviews before then.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,257 posts
Gallery: 1675 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10557
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
May 13, 2014 16:33 |  #32

Heya,

Granted, all of this is from an APS-C perspective.

One thing about full frame, is that lenses in the 20~30mm range are great for landscape. And you can get vintage glass that is plenty sharp enough, for next to nothing, for nice landscape. 28mm lenses are like $30~50 with a $10 adapter, M42 mounts. They're not wide on a crop. But on a full frame, they're great for "bang for buck" landscapers.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Preeb
Goldmember
Avatar
2,600 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 658
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Logan County, CO
     
May 13, 2014 17:58 |  #33

Mike55 wrote in post #16902130 (external link)
I'd jump all over that new 10-18, Norski. Not sure when it will be on the shelves though. The MTF looks sharper than the 10-22.

Except for the fact that it's essentially a plastic mount kit lens. The 18-55 is sharp too, but lacks a certain something called durability. The 10-18 is designed to meet the short end of the 18-55 and 55-250 pair.

I'd have to see a real life comparison (not a lab chart test) to believe that it's functionally sharper than my 10-22. And I'll also reserve judgement until I see how it handles flare, something the 10-22 excels at.


Rick
6D Mark II - EF 17-40 f4 L -- EF 100mm f2.8 L IS Macro -- EF 70-200 f4 L IS w/1.4 II TC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike55
Goldmember
Avatar
4,206 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois
     
May 13, 2014 20:06 as a reply to  @ Preeb's post |  #34

The 10-22 is well known for its flimsy build quality. I've often heard it described as "kit lens level", so I don;t see how this new 10-18 will be much worse in that department.


6D | 70D | 24-105 L IS | 17-40 L | 300 F4 L IS | 50 1.8 II | 1.4x II | LR5 | HV30 | bug spray | wilderness
Gallatin National Forest, Montana (external link)/Lassen Volcanic NP Campgrounds (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,124 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 440
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
May 13, 2014 20:12 as a reply to  @ Mike55's post |  #35

OP -- did you get your question answered or are you sorry you asked? if I could only have one lens on a 1.6 crop and my interest was landscapes I'd go for the 15-85 without hesitation. if you are more budget conscious id get the tamron 17-50 non-IS


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mine1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,289 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Kalispell Montana
     
May 13, 2014 20:38 |  #36

all i see is him saying that he gets more use out of the long end than the wide end but I didn't see him say it was better iq at the long end. (I read it really fast and apologize in advance if I missed it)


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/81190407@N08/ (external link)
Canon 60d.Canon 18-135, 55-250 II, and 10-18 stm. and Benro C-1681t Travel Angel, with Sirui K20x head.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike55
Goldmember
Avatar
4,206 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois
     
May 13, 2014 20:45 |  #37

Look at the wide angle crops. It could've been a bad copy. You never know.


6D | 70D | 24-105 L IS | 17-40 L | 300 F4 L IS | 50 1.8 II | 1.4x II | LR5 | HV30 | bug spray | wilderness
Gallatin National Forest, Montana (external link)/Lassen Volcanic NP Campgrounds (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mine1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,289 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Kalispell Montana
     
May 13, 2014 21:04 |  #38

ahh I did glance at those and it did seem worse but not enough that they even mentioned it, and there are lots that say it is best there. either way it is very good at both ends even wide open (compared to the lenses in its class) and is a great option for anyone not needing a low light action lens.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/81190407@N08/ (external link)
Canon 60d.Canon 18-135, 55-250 II, and 10-18 stm. and Benro C-1681t Travel Angel, with Sirui K20x head.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Preeb
Goldmember
Avatar
2,600 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 658
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Logan County, CO
     
May 13, 2014 21:04 |  #39

Mike55 wrote in post #16902749 (external link)
The 10-22 is well known for its flimsy build quality. I've often heard it described as "kit lens level", so I don;t see how this new 10-18 will be much worse in that department.

I've been using it for 2 years, nothing flimsy about it. Try something sometime before you knock it.

You can see from my sig that I have 3 EF-S and 2 "L" lenses, and they are all the best at what they do for what I need. I also used to have a 17-40 L, also a nice lens, but, less range, slower and and no better IQ on a crop body than the 17-55 all made it less attractive for me.

You would probably call the 17-55 "flimsy" too, yet it's my most used lens - it's on my 60D more than 75% of the time - fast, accurate, and a perfect general use lens for me.


Rick
6D Mark II - EF 17-40 f4 L -- EF 100mm f2.8 L IS Macro -- EF 70-200 f4 L IS w/1.4 II TC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike55
Goldmember
Avatar
4,206 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois
     
May 13, 2014 22:12 |  #40

Preeb wrote in post #16902871 (external link)
I've been using it for 2 years, nothing flimsy about it. Try something sometime before you knock it.

I owned the lens. It felt like a kit lens.

You would probably call the 17-55 "flimsy" too,

Yes I would.

:)


6D | 70D | 24-105 L IS | 17-40 L | 300 F4 L IS | 50 1.8 II | 1.4x II | LR5 | HV30 | bug spray | wilderness
Gallatin National Forest, Montana (external link)/Lassen Volcanic NP Campgrounds (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jbrackjr
Senior Member
481 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Georgia, USA
     
May 13, 2014 22:28 |  #41

ed rader wrote in post #16902765 (external link)
OP -- did you get your question answered or are you sorry you asked? if I could only have one lens on a 1.6 crop and my interest was landscapes I'd go for the 15-85 without hesitation. if you are more budget conscious id get the tamron 17-50 non-IS

I agree with Ed. I have both of those and will not let them go. :lol:


Jim
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jmooberry
Member
83 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Lincoln, NE
     
May 14, 2014 13:17 |  #42

Mike55 wrote in post #16902985 (external link)
I owned the lens. It felt like a kit lens.

Yes I would.

:)

Did either ever fall apart?


Jim
Gripped 60D | 10-22 3.5-4.5 | 17-55 2,8 | 55-250 4.5-5.6 | Sigma 18-35 1.8 ART | Sigma 50-100 1.8 ART |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mine1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,289 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Kalispell Montana
     
May 14, 2014 13:21 |  #43

and really why would you even bother commenting on build quality here (which is quite good on the 15-85 anyway), when the op says right in there in the name of the post "affordable" lens. Now I know that affordable is relative to what someone makes, but pretty much anytime I have seen someone post about "affordable" they are usually not looking for L lens build quality.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/81190407@N08/ (external link)
Canon 60d.Canon 18-135, 55-250 II, and 10-18 stm. and Benro C-1681t Travel Angel, with Sirui K20x head.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Doctor ­ NO
Hatchling
3 posts
Joined May 2014
Location: Serbia
     
May 14, 2014 14:43 |  #44

Hello everyone.
My lens is nice and sharp copy but i have a litle "problem" with it.
Do you have a movement of the front element of the lens at the 15mm. And if you have a fallowing of 60-70mm to 24-30mm when the lens facing downwards or upwards. That's not a big problem, but this shift in the front element is.
Today I took the lens from Canon authorized repair service and they could not fix the scroll but are just slightly tighten the three screws in front element and still moving forward. How yours copies of the lens 15-85 behave.
Sorry for bad english.


Canon 60d, Canon 15-85 IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Preeb
Goldmember
Avatar
2,600 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 658
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Logan County, CO
     
May 14, 2014 14:52 |  #45

mine1 wrote in post #16904140 (external link)
and really why would you even bother commenting on build quality here (which is quite good on the 15-85 anyway), when the op says right in there in the name of the post "affordable" lens. Now I know that affordable is relative to what someone makes, but pretty much anytime I have seen someone post about "affordable" they are usually not looking for L lens build quality.

Exactly. There are really only a couple of "affordable L" lenses, and even then the affordability is relative.

For a crop body, the EF-S 17-55 is a better lens choice than either the 17-40 L or 16-35 L, and none of them are exactly cheap, with the 17-40 being the closest to affordable). The 70-200 f4 IS or f2.8 IS II are both optically better than the older non IS versions, but also significantly pricier. Nobody would call any of them affordable.

Affordable for a crop camera are 50mm f1.8, 18-55, 55-250, the STM versions of those, (all basically kit lens quality), and then the 15-85 on the high end. The other sometimes affordable option is third party, which can then also bring in other issues.


Rick
6D Mark II - EF 17-40 f4 L -- EF 100mm f2.8 L IS Macro -- EF 70-200 f4 L IS w/1.4 II TC

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

7,985 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 15-85mm best affordable lens for landscapes?
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 Wahama90
846 guests, 207 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.