Just picked up a Canon 15-85mm

Not sure if it is that much better so as to justify the price. Here are a few fast picks I snapped after I got it. I have not had much time with it since the day light went fast. The indoor shots I did on a tripod and I framed the shot first with the kit lens and locked the tripod in place. I swapped lenses and I noticed right away that even with the same focal length set and same camera settings the frame look slightly different. they are both EFS lenses so i am not sure why that is.

The pics are the jpegs straight out of the camera with no changes at all. Can anyone honestly tell me the 15-85mm is worth it over the kit? I have until Jan 24th to take the lens back to Best Buy.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Your not going to notice a great difference or change in IQ until you get a constant f2.8 zoom or fast prime.

All digital photos require post processing.

Where did you expect to see improvement?

Would've thought the advantage was in the extra 2mm wide and extra 30mm tele to be honest.

EDIT: 3mm wide lol

wfarrell4 wrote in post #13451518
Your not going to notice a great difference or change in IQ until you get a constant f2.8 zoom or fast prime.

All digital photos require post processing.

17-55. Sweet lens.

daleftw wrote in post #13451534
Would've thought the advantage was in the extra 2mm wide and extra 30mm tele to be honest.

+1. I wouldn't expect much of a difference in IQ since the 18-55 IS is already considered to be pretty good.

To the OP - before you drink the kool aid, realize this is the sort of behavior canon encourages. They want you pixel peeping these lenses. Otherwise, you might focus all your energies on learning composition and technique instead of spending the college fund on L glass.

Trust me. I speak from experience.

I guess the ring USM, 4 stop IS and better build quality don't matter either...

I expected to see sharper images than the kit lens. I also expected that the auto focus would be faster and it just isnt. It is actually taking longer to auto focus. I wanted a slightly wider lens but also a lens with more zoom and it seemed like the best option right now. I guess it is going back to best Buy tomorrow. This is the 4th lens I have tried without any real noticed difference in IQ. I tried Sigma Tokina and Tamron. I think the only way this lens is worth it is for the increased focal range but then again there are better option for a little more money. I want bigger focal range in a lens that still had IS for hand held shots.

Do oyu think you 15-85 Af's better than a kit? My kit seemed to do it faster but that is just me. Since you own this lens do you feel it was worth while? Honestly?

I am going to use it some more tomorrow and see how it goes. My kit lens in some outdoor shots does seem to soften in the corners and edges. I can get some decent shots with it though that I like.

Stone 13 wrote in post #13451630
I guess the ring USM, 4 stop IS and better build quality don't matter either...

[QUOTE=HDR Fan;13451633]I expected to see sharper images than the kit lens.
You might want to look into some 'L' primes then. The 18-55 kit lens is considered to be pretty decent optically, especially when stopped down a notch or two. IQ improvements are going to be relatively small unless you really step up to the plate money-wise.

HDR Fan wrote in post #13451633
I want bigger focal range in a lens that still had IS for hand held shots.

Sigma 17-70. Don't know that the IQ is noticeably better (I don't pixel-peep or pay attention to MTF charts), but the aperture range (f/2.8-4) is better than the 18-55, autofocus is fast and silent and the focal range is better.

[QUOTE=Veemac;13451663​]

HDR Fan wrote in post #13451633
I expected to see sharper images than the kit lens.
You might want to look into some 'L' primes then. The 18-55 kit lens is considered to be pretty decent optically, especially when stopped down a notch or two. IQ improvements are going to be relatively small unless you really step up to the plate money-wise.


Sigma 17-70. Don't know that the IQ is noticeably better (I don't pixel-peep or pay attention to MTF charts), but the aperture range (f/2.8-4) is better than the 18-55, autofocus is fast and silent and the focal range is better.

That one seems pretty nice for the money. May have to look into it.

Get the 18-200. That lens flat out blows my mind. Much bigger focal range and is.

I always thought the 18-55 IS kit lens these days got pretty good reviews IQ wise by the way. It was the older non IS ones that weren't very good.

mattograph wrote in post #13451676
Get the 18-200. That lens flat out blows my mind. Much bigger focal range and is.

You know I agree with this oddly enough.