Thoughts on the 15-85 F3.5-5.6?

nate42nd wrote in post #14300484
I considered the 15-85 before buying my 17-55. I LOVE the constant F/2.8 aperture of the 17-55.

I believe the 15-85 is a good lens but too "slow" for the money. If you want a good lens get a 17-55 or even a 24-105 (which I also own). Both are 300 bucks more but worth it IMO.

All that said....the 15-85 is still a tempting lens IF your style supports it and you're willing to use a variable aperture lens. I like fixed aperture (as do all who have used them)

I would not get a third party lens. They twist the wrong way!

I'm not criticizing the 24-105mm. But at f4 is not all that fast. and on cropped frame sensor it's not terribly wide either.

nate42nd wrote in post #14300484
I believe the 15-85 is a good lens but too "slow" for the money. If you want a good lens get a 17-55 or even a 24-105 (which I also own). Both are 300 bucks more but worth it IMO.

So the 24-105, which is slower than the 15-85 at the wide end, and faster at the long end, but still slow overall, is worth $1000, but the 15-85 is too slow for $700?

Not all of them.

I just received my 15-85 and I love it....

It is a heavy lens. You can feel (and see) the quality. Focusing is almost instantaneous (as compared to the Tamron and Sigma 17-50 variety) and silent. I have the nifty 50 which has a speed of f1.8 although I never use it because it is impossible to focus at that f-stop since the depth of field is so narrow. If you think you need a fast lens you need to ask yourself if you will have an opportunity to use it. I stop my nifty 50 down quite a bit in order to use it in everyday circumstances.

This snapshot is right out of the camera. No PP.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/40721325@N08/7​097500057/

Nice pic Gawain.

I am going back and forth on whether to buy the 15-85 or the sigma 17-70 but this thread is beginging to tip the scale toward the 15-85. It just seems to have such nice image quality and i do have a 35mm f2 for low light stuff.

Do you mind if I ask you where you purchased it from? I have seen threads on here that say it should sell for around $700 but the places i see it are either around $800 or are places I have never heard of.

mwsilver wrote in post #14301774
The conventional wisdom is that this lens is too expensive and too slow.

I agree with the conventional wisdom, the 15-85 is too slow,
too expensive, and not as sharp as the Tamron and Sigma 17-50 2.8

From low-light portraits:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70864​52349/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70897​73941/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/69403​88220/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70864​53549/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70829​11323/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70873​37013/

advaitin wrote in post #14303136
From low-light portraits:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70864​52349/
IMG_8059 by C L Griffin/Advaitin, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70897​73941/
IMG_8287 by C L Griffin/Advaitin, on Flickr

to travel scenes:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/69403​88220/
IMG_8073 by C L Griffin/Advaitin, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70864​53549/
IMG_8061 by C L Griffin/Advaitin, on Flickr

to macro:

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70829​11323/
IMG_7953 by C L Griffin/Advaitin, on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70873​37013/
IMG_8155_resize by C L Griffin/Advaitin, on Flickr

What lens you gonna call, when one has to do for all? These unedited shots (other than all being resized down to 1500x1500) from a trip to Holland this past week.

Cool. But i think you neglected to indicate which lens you used

mwsilver wrote in post #14303328
Cool. But i think you neglected to indicate which lens you used

And the subject line is "thoughts on the 15-85..." I thought it was unnecessary to say Canon 60D with 15-85mm EFS lens.

advaitin wrote in post #14303468
And the subject line is "thoughts on the 15-85..." I thought it was unnecessary to say Canon 60D with 15-85mm EFS lens.

Yes, but a number of other lenses with better low light capability were also mentioned. Since your first photo highlighted low light capability one could assume you were talking about a faster lens. Having said that, I agree with you about the 15-85 versatility and quality. I thinks most folks who criticize it probably have never owned or used one. With almost 4 "real" stops of IS vs the 24-105mm tested 2-3 stops, the 15-85 is actually almost as fast as that f4 L lens.

ISO 800 @ f4.5 and 1/60 is hardly low light, anyway.

When I was young and spry, ASA/ISO 800 was for low light!

How about an ISO 1600 portrait:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/69369​27098/

The down side is the average selling price of the 15-85 seems to have gone up. It used to sell online in the range of $699 to $739 USD. I bought mine at Abe's of Maine in January with a Canon rebate and an Abe's $10 coupon for just $655. Now Abe's, B$H and others are all selling it for $799. That's $150 more than I spent. Not sure what this is about. The price of the 24-105 still varies from around $1075 to $1150.

mwsilver wrote in post #14303911
Yes, but a number of other lenses with better low light capability were also mentioned. Since your first photo highlighted low light capability one could assume you were talking about a faster lens. Having said that, I agree with you about the 15-85 versatility and quality. I thinks most folks who criticize it probably have never owned or used one. With almost 4 "real" stops of IS vs the 24-105mm tested 2-3 stops, the 15-85 is actually almost as fast as that f4 L lens.

When I use a full frame camera, I often use the 24-105mm to cover the same usage. I also have the 17-55 EFS f2.8, but think the 15-85 works better for me the majority of times.

I'd be remiss if I didn't add that I also took a few shots with the 70-300 DO--the birds, one edited, at 300mm and the landscape, edited, at 70mm.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/69535​96276/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70996​52867/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70996​55067/

advaitin wrote in post #14303136

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/clgriffin/70864​53549/
IMG_8061 by C L Griffin/Advaitin, on Flickr

Man do I like this picture.

JersFocus wrote in post #14304125
Man do I like this picture.

Thanks. This is how I was going about, shooting (although a different day).

Photo by Ron Fust.