Just need more range

Had the 15-85mm 3.5-5.6 IS for 2 weeks now. Its a fine lens, but im finding I'm wanting a bit more range. This past weekend at a family party, it felt like I was to "up close and personal" with my shots. Felt like I needed to be farther away and not so annoying if you know what i mean. I went to my local shop and took a few shots with the 70-200 f/4 L non IS. Seems the price is right. I would be trading/selling the 15-85mm to fund the 70-200. Would this solve my problem, with still keeping great image quality?

DanFrank wrote in post #14667096
Had the 15-85mm 3.5-5.6 IS for 2 weeks now. Its a fine lens, but im finding I'm wanting a bit more range. This past weekend at a family party, it felt like I was to "up close and personal" with my shots. Felt like I needed to be farther away and not so annoying if you know what i mean. I went to my local shop and took a few shots with the 70-200 f/4 L non IS. Seems the price is right. I would be trading/selling the 15-85mm to fund the 70-200. Would this solve my problem, with still keeping great image quality?

Adding the 70-200 might solve your problem. Don't sell the 15-85, that is a very useful range of focal lengths.

^Yes, it would solve "getting in people's face", but unless that's the only kind of shots you plan on taking..70mm wide end on crop will leave you wanting. You will miss more pics, going this route. Maybe you can scrounge and save the money to pick up an EF-S 55-250 IS, which, together with the 15-85, will give you nice coverage.

edit: i see you have a nifty fifty, which is still pretty long for the "wide" end of your range.

Like you, I shoot with a crop sensor, so I have the same FOV to work with. I know exactly what you are describing. My go-to lens for candids of people is a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. I own the 15-85 too, but it is slower, and I almost never want wider than 28 for candids. However, sometimes I can't get close enough, or I want a tight head shot, or I find people getting cranky if I am too close. For that, I use the 70-200. However, I have the IS version. If you are doing candids, 200mm on a crop is a long lens for hand-holding with a crop sensor camera. The old rule of thumb, adjusted for crop sensors, is that you would need shutter speeds of at least 1/320 at 200mm. Of course, if you are in dim light and use flash, this is not a problem, but even with flash, if the ambient light is bright enough, you will need a fast shutter speed. The IS version is also sharper than the non-IS, but it is an expensive lens.

I wouldn't consider having only the 70-200. It's way too long for many purposes, including a lot of candids.

1Tanker wrote in post #14667174
^Yes, it would solve "getting in people's face", but unless that's the only kind of shots you plan on taking..70mm wide end on crop will leave you wanting. You will miss more pics, going this route. Maybe you can scrounge and save the money to pick up an EF-S 55-250 IS, which, together with the 15-85, will give you nice coverage.

Seconded.

get a 55-250IS, and save for the L or another lens while using it...it's cheap, and will give you some good shots...i wouldn't even consider exchanging the 15-85 for being stuck with only a telephoto lens...

Thanks everyone. Will do. Keeping the 15-85 and saving for the 55-250IS or saving longer for the 70-200 IS L

I shot with a 70-200mm f/4L IS lens for years and never really liked it. I was always a slave to bright light or I needed a tripod or some other such support. I just couldn't get the 1/500 second shutter speed I needed to hand hold the camera (at 200mm) in any but the brightest light conditions.

I use my 70-200mm f/4L IS 4-5x more often than I ever was able to use the non-IS version because I can hand hold that lens in lower light levels. This makes it an all-around lens. I can shoot at 1/60 second using 200mm @f/4 and expect 100% sharp shots. The IS Mode-II on this lens allows me to pan with IS turned on.

Although the 70-200mm f/4L non-IS was a very good lens, it is not quite up to the IQ of the IS model. Additionally, the bokeh of the IS model is better due to rounded aperture blades.

Rather than a 70-200mm f/4L non-IS lens; I would select a Canon or Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 (IS or VC) lens. The 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS lens would also be a budget priced alternative.

The 70-200 is a great lens. But, do not sell your 15-85. There are times when you will want the wider angle, and standard zoom... like family stuff, normal shots, etc... If you do not have the money to straight buy the 70-200... there is always a 55-250 IS or 70-300mm.

I agree with keeping your current lens and getting the lower priced 55-250. It is a pretty good lens, while the 70-200 f/whatever IS/no-IS is/are excellent lenses. Me personally, I want IS. You can pick up the 55-250 relatively cheap and it will cover what you want. It will let you know if you want the IS or not, when/if you move to better glass (use it with IS on and with it turned off).

A lot of people like the 55-250. I didn't. Had one for a week and shipped it back to Amazon. An excellent lens, and cheaper than the 70-200, is the Tamron SP AF70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC. Currently $349 at Adorama (after rebate). And it has image stabilization.

I'd rather go for a second hand 70-200L f4 with or without IS than a new 55-250. I'm actually looking to add a 70-200 myself but I'm still unsure exactly which one to go for.

Personally, I would not get a lens in that range, with that aperture (slow) without IS. You are better off saving for something with IS, or getting a 55-250 - which does have IS. Getting a lens without IS only makes it harder to rid yourself of later on ; let's see- when someone has a non-IS lens, and decides to upgrade, what do they generally upgrade to - a similar lens with IS.

Note: You might also consider a lens like the 18-135- if that range will suit you... From a 15-85- not sure if I would want to though. In my opinion, the 18-135 is a fine lens for what it is- a kit lens- and performs admirably.. Always heard that the 15-85 was a little better though.

wayne.robbins wrote in post #14668699
Personally, I would not get a lens in that range, with that aperture (slow) without IS. You are better off saving for something with IS, or getting a 55-250 - which does have IS. Getting a lens without IS only makes it harder to rid yourself of later on ; let's see- when someone has a non-IS lens, and decides to upgrade, what do they generally upgrade to - a similar lens with IS.

Note: You might also consider a lens like the 18-135- if that range will suit you... From a 15-85- not sure if I would want to though. In my opinion, the 18-135 is a fine lens for what it is- a kit lens- and performs admirably.. Always heard that the 15-85 was a little better though.

true, which is probably why you can pick up a used 70-200 f4 without IS at some really good prices. I think I'd still prefer a used 70-200 f4 to a new 55-250 IS whilst saving up for a 70-200 f2.8 IS II.

Searched Craigslist by the OP, a 55-250 for an asking price of $150. There were no used 70-200s of any kind, so new around $700. When I see it used people still want at least $500 for it. Is the nifty-250 the 70-200 - no! Will it do what the OP wants - yes (21 to 30% the price). That is a $350 to $550 savings now waiting to get the IS model - if he even needs to.

The OP is not a pro. He has been shooting for an entire 2 weeks. Wants extra reach. Wants to shoot a little more discretely (A big white lens, even farther away, says I'm shooting at you). If shooting inside, chances are if either lens needs a flash - both will still need a flash. Thinks he would have to sell his current lens to fund the 70-200. And if he ever upgraded, still has a very decent light weight zoom for travel or whatever. So, I still stand by saying get the 55-250 is probably the best choice for the OP.

By the way (mostly directed at the OP), the $150 is the asking price, he might be able to get one for even less if he haggles.