Anyone that has owned both care to give their thoughts. I have the original 17-70 non OS and have been thinking of getting a 15-85. Which is better? I like the 17-70 range and am not interested in other zoom ranges.
Jun 13, 2012 22:20 | #1 Anyone that has owned both care to give their thoughts. I have the original 17-70 non OS and have been thinking of getting a 15-85. Which is better? I like the 17-70 range and am not interested in other zoom ranges. 7D MKII ■ 10-22 ■ 15-85 ■ 28-135 ■ Σ 50-150 ■ 70-200 f4L ■ 100-400L ■ 580EX II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
5280Pics Goldmember  More info | Jun 13, 2012 22:51 | #2 The Sigma has been living on my camera since I got it. It is a great lens, and I love the ratio on a crop. I have never owned the 15-85 but, looking through the lens sample thread here, I would say it is a bit sharper than the Sigma. I'm quite torn wheather I should sell the Sigma for the Canon. I just like the 2.8-4.0 too much to pull the trigger. _______________
LOG IN TO REPLY |
thephotographynut Member 128 posts Joined May 2012 More info | Jun 13, 2012 23:01 | #3 I've not used the sigma. I almost always buy Canon glass because I want to ensure it will work with future bodies. I do love the 15-85. Since I got it a few years ago, it is the primary lens I use for everyday photos and it has replaced my 17-40 f/4L for pro work based on the IQ. It is also one of my favorite landscape lenses. The 15-85 is amazingly sharp, has amazing colors and feels like a brick. It does have a fit of lens creep at 85mm and pointed up, a little CA wide open at 15mm and slight vignetting at 85 and wide open. Both of these are easily fixed and have not been an issue for me, even for professional clients paying thousands for photos.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
1Tanker Goldmember  4,470 posts Likes: 8 Joined Jan 2011 Location: Swaying to the Symphony of Destruction More info | If you had the OS version, i would say no.. but IS/OS is very handy on a walkaround lens like these. The extra 15mm on the long end isn't so much, but 2mm on the wide end is nice, when you just can't back up. Kel
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sirrith Cream of the Crop More info | Jun 14, 2012 03:26 | #5 I believe kfreels has used both. Might be worth sending him a message. -Tom
LOG IN TO REPLY |
msowsun "approx 8mm"  More info | Jun 14, 2012 08:03 | #6 I upgraded from the original Sigma 17-70 non-OS to the 15-85. The Canon is miles ahead in every respect. The 17-70 OS is no better optically than the older non-OS so all you gain is OS. Mike Sowsun / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.4 USM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 100-400 II / EF 1.4x II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 14, 2012 09:36 | #7 msowsun wrote in post #14577550  The 17-70 OS is no better optically than the older non-OS so all you gain is OS. Say who? The general consensus drone what I've seen on here is the OS version is far better optically then the non OS.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
msowsun "approx 8mm" More info | Jun 14, 2012 09:57 | #8 Two reviews that compare the two versions say the OS version no better or even slightly worse. (may they had a bad copy?) No other reviews I have seen compare the new OS version with the old version. While the older version of Sigma's 17-70mm doesn't have the same aperture capability of the new version or optical stabilization, it produced markedly sharper images - though it could be that there are sharper copies of the 17-70mm OS we tested. Photozone http://www.photozone.de …s/517-sigma1770f284osapsc The Sigma lens has a very similar resolution characteristic like its non-OS cousin. The center performance is very fine straight at 17mm @ f/2.8 and it even gets excellent when stopping down. The borders start with good figures here whereas the corners are somewhat soft and you should stop down to f/4 to overcome these corner problems. The peak performance is reached at f/5.6 with a generally very good quality across the frame. The sweetest focal lengths are 24-40mm - it may not reach the stars but the lens shows no significant weakness anymore here. At 70mm there's a more pronounced drop in contrast at f/4 and the measured center figures weren't quite as good here anymore. However, the resolution remains fine and the contrasts get somewhat more snappier from f/5.6 onwards. The lens wasn't perfectly centered which is not uncommon for lenses with an optical image stabilizer. Mike Sowsun / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.4 USM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 100-400 II / EF 1.4x II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
msowsun "approx 8mm" More info | Jun 14, 2012 10:31 | #9 gremlin75 wrote in post #14577976 Also the AF on the OS version is faster (HSM motor) The HSM is more quiet, but it is really not any faster than the old version. Mike Sowsun / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.4 USM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 100-400 II / EF 1.4x II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sirrith Cream of the Crop More info | Jun 14, 2012 10:35 | #10 msowsun wrote in post #14578259 The HSM is more quiet, but it is really not any faster than the old version. New OS HSM version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zd72sSu0kns Old version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DacLsYRPszU I'm not sure if this makes any difference, but could be worth pointing out that in the first vid the lens is at its widest setting, and in the second its at its longest. I'd test it with mine to see if it did have an effect, but I don't have it with me now. -Tom
LOG IN TO REPLY |
HughR Senior Member  999 posts Joined Feb 2011 Location: Toronto, Ontario More info | Jun 14, 2012 12:57 | #11 Another vote for the Canon 15-85mm IS lens. It's incredibly sharp, and the IS is extremely effective. Also, 15mm is noticably wider than 17-18mm. Finally, build quality is excellent. Hugh
LOG IN TO REPLY |
gcogger Goldmember 2,554 posts Likes: 1 Joined Mar 2003 Location: Southampton, UK More info | Jun 14, 2012 14:57 | #12 I switched from the non-OS Sigma to the Canon 15-85mm. For me the big advantages were the extra 2mm at the wide end, and the USM focusing (although I guess IS is nice too!). Optically, the Sigma is not great wide open, but very good stopped down. Given that the Canon is a slower lens, I'd place them pretty much equal when set to the same apertures - they're both very good Graeme
LOG IN TO REPLY |
MGLittle Member  84 posts Joined Dec 2009 Location: Bakersfield, CA More info | Jun 14, 2012 15:11 | #13 Don't have any experience with the Sigma, but the Canon 15-85 is a great lens. Excellent build quality and sharpness. I was actually looking to pick up a used Sigma 17-70 when the Canon fell into my lap. Haven't looked back. 5D3, 50D, Sig 35/1.4A, EF 35/2 IS, EF 40/2.8, EF 50/1.4, Sig 50/1.4, EF 85/1.8, EF 24-105/4L IS, EF 70-200/2.8L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ConCon Member 110 posts Joined Mar 2011 More info | Does the wider aperture overall of the sigma offer any significant advantage over the canon? For indoor pictures and low light? im still torn between the 2. The answer to this question will be helpful in deciding. I like the Canon, but I like the idea of the wider 2.8-4
LOG IN TO REPLY |
msowsun "approx 8mm" More info | Jun 14, 2012 19:05 | #15 The Sigma offers just slightly less than 1 stop more aperture wide open. But remember that this advantage is overshadowed by the fact that the 15-85 is sharp wide open while the 17-70 needs to be stopped down for equal sharpness. This is very apparent at the longer focal lengths. Mike Sowsun / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.4 USM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 100-400 II / EF 1.4x II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is semonsters 867 guests, 134 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
Bear in mind also that the Canon seems noticeably bulkier and heavier, if that matters to you.