17-55 vs 15-85 vs 24-105L

Recently I've discovered a renewed appreciation for zoom lenses as I've begun taking my DSLR out more. I like the convenience aspect of 1 camera/ 1 lens at times.

I'd like to consider adding a zoom to replace my kit 18-55. These 3 lenses are what I'm considering, but each have pros/ cons.

I enjoy shooting people, and having rented a 24-105L previously, my favorite pictures were all in that 70-90mm range. That being said I also shoot indoors a decent amount, and I found the f/4 to be pretty slow. But I was using an XSi at the time, which I refused to push to over ISO 800. On my 60D, I don't mind going to ISO 3200, so maybe that will be ok?

The 17-55 would be terrific for indoor use I think, but does lack that longer end that I really enjoy.

The 15-85 is similar to the 24-105 for me in that it gives me the longer end I'd like, but lacks the speed for indoor/ low-light use.

Another consideration is I'm now quite sure I'd like to go to full frame in about a year once I raise the funds. So I wouldn't have to sell off the EF lens.

Of course another option would be to just use my 18-55 and maybe add a light small prime - like the 85 1.8 to my collection. I could fit that into a smaller bag no problem.

I am interested in the responses, too. Considering FF w/24-105. If not FF, then 15-85. I already sold my 18-55. I see advantages and disadvantages for all three. 17-55 is just too much money, for such a limited range. I have a 50 1.8 - $90 and and 28 2.8 - -$40 if I need fast glass.

Do you have a shoe-mounted flash(ie. 580EX II/430EX II)? If so, the 15-85 would be great..if you like to go wide, and use flash indoors. If you don't want to go as wide, the 24-105 will give you that extra bit better portrait shots, with 105mm and f/4.. and again, use flash indoors.

1Tanker wrote in post #15066295
Do you have a shoe-mounted flash(ie. 580EX II/430EX II)? If so, the 15-85 would be great..if you like to go wide, and use flash indoors. If you don't want to go as wide, the 24-105 will give you that extra bit better portrait shots, with 105mm and f/4.. and again, use flash indoors.

No flash, lol don't even know how to use one. Maybe that should be next on my list? I've found the 50mm 1.8 to be fairly decent for my indoor uses so I haven't really felt the urge to get/ use a flash, although I guess I should since that skill seems to come in handy even in well lit situations

The Dark Knight wrote in post #15066310
No flash, lol don't even know how to use one. Maybe that should be next on my list? I've found the 50mm 1.8 to be fairly decent for my indoor uses so I haven't really felt the urge to get/ use a flash, although I guess I should since that skill seems to come in handy even in well lit situations

First priority should be to get a flash.

Personally, I think the 24-105L works better on a full frame body, but it all depends on your shooting style. I would want something wider.

I owned the 17-55 f/2.8 for six years, and it was a terrific lens on three different crop bodies. The only reason I sold it was because I added a 5D3 to my kit, and the 17-55 was not going to be used any longer.

However, if I was buying for a crop today, I would probably go with the EFS 15-85 instead, and supplement it with a couple of fast primes. That is how I am using the 24-105 on the 5D3, and am very pleased with the combination. The 15-85 was not available when I bought the 17-55.

The Dark Knight wrote in post #15066310
No flash, lol don't even know how to use one. Maybe that should be next on my list? I've found the 50mm 1.8 to be fairly decent for my indoor uses so I haven't really felt the urge to get/ use a flash, although I guess I should since that skill seems to come in handy even in well lit situations

Yes.. flash would be a wise move. Even f/2.8 isn't fast enough for indoor shots..many times, so a flash would be useful in those scenarios as well. Flash is also great..for fill light, taking "people" pics outdoors.. where you don't want the background sky, etc., blown out.

Scott M wrote in post #15066350
First priority should be to get a flash.

Personally, I think the 24-105L works better on a full frame body, but it all depends on your shooting style. I would want something wider.

I owned the 17-55 f/2.8 for six years, and it was a terrific lens on three different crop bodies. The only reason I sold it was because I added a 5D3 to my kit, and the 17-55 was not going to be used any longer.

However, if I was buying for a crop today, I would probably go with the EFS 15-85 instead, and supplement it with a couple of fast primes. That is how I am using the 24-105 on the 5D3, and am very pleased with the combination. The 15-85 was not available when I bought the 17-55.

Thanks, I am leaning towards 15-85. But is that a good idea knowing I'll go full frame in about a year?

I love the 24-105 as a general purpose lens when outside or inside with a flash. A flash is required in my home even with an f/2.8 lens.

I agonized for weeks whether to get a 17-55mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8 or 24-105mm f/4.0 for general purpose needs. I decided the extra length of the 24-105 would be more useful than a wider or faster lens. I have never regretted getting the 24-105mm lens.

My 70-200mm f/2.8 IS is my most used lens but the 24-105 is the lens I would keep if owning only one lens.

Craign wrote in post #15066383
I love the 24-105 as a general purpose lens when outside or inside with a flash. A flash is required in my home even with an f/2.8 lens.

I agonized for weeks whether to get a 17-55mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8 or 24-105mm f/4.0 for general purpose needs. I decided the extra length of the 24-105 would be more useful than a wider or faster lens. I have never regretted getting the 24-105mm lens.

My 70-200mm f/2.8 IS is my most used lens but the 24-105 is the lens I would keep if owning only one lens.

Thanks Craig. Since you have the 70-200 I guess you may not use the 24-105 much for this purpose, but on a crop, have you tried using it for stuff like sports (say in an arena) or wildlife? Do you find the long end fairly decent for this type of use, or does it come up short?

The Dark Knight wrote in post #15066424
Thanks Craig. Since you have the 70-200 I guess you may not use the 24-105 much for this purpose, but on a crop, have you tried using it for stuff like sports (say in an arena) or wildlife? Do you find the long end fairly decent for this type of use, or does it come up short?

The 24-105 is okay for some youth sports that use small fields (like U4 and U6 soccer.) T-ball fields are large enough to need 200mm for shots around second base. It is too slow in our gyms for any sports and too short for wildlife. I have used it at the Kentucky Derby with great results.

Many of my inside shots are of our 2 and 4 yr. olds. The focal length is usually at 70-105 because I like to eliminate as much room clutter as possible (shoot tight, crop tighter.) My avatar is at 105mm across a dining table.

Even the 70-200 f/2.8 is too slow in our gyms and marginally long enough for wildlife where I live.

I had this dilema as well. I use fast primes for indoor shooting, and I want something lighter than the 24-105L or the 17-55IS for travel.
The 15-85IS is a sharp lens, but it is F5.6 over much of the range. This gives it the functioning of the 18-55IS indoors, as it requires a flash for people photos. I'd rather use the 24-105L at F4 than the 15-85IS at F5.6. The 17-55IS is a fast lens, but while F2.8 is fast enough in my house during the day, it fails at night.
I also had the Tokina 12-24F4 prior to getting the Canon L, so this may have altered the equation for me.
Your decision comes down to a question of aperture and focal lengths. For travel and photos of large buildings, the lenses with shorter focal lengths will do better. For shots at an event, like a street scence, the longer focal lengths may help. Unfortunately, there is no good 15-105 F2.8L out there yet. If there were, you would need to hire a gorilla to carry it around.

The 15-85mm is not 5.6 most of it range. It's 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.6 for all the range. the 3.5 is only until 17mm though.

If you go full frame next year, yeah, you might do well to go with the 24-105mm. Or maybe, for the almost same price, the Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC.

I plan to go full frame next year too but will keep my 15-85mm on a crop body in the bag.

The Dark Knight wrote in post #15066376
Thanks, I am leaning towards 15-85. But is that a good idea knowing I'll go full frame in about a year?

If you will be purchasing a new FF body, then you can get a new 24-105L as part of the kit for about the same price as a used lens. So, it is really better to buy it when you get the camera, IMO. If you plan on buying a used FF body, though, this is irrelevant.

If you buy a used EFS lens (either 17-55 f/2.8 or 15-85), you should be able to sell it in a year for almost no loss.

I am a firm believer in buying for what you have now, not for what you may have in the future. The only exception is if you absolutely know you will be buying a full frame in the next few months.

Another vote for flash, that's what I did also instead of replacing my kit lens.

You have some great advice above. My 2 cents:
1) Flash, if you learn to use it well, will improve your people shots more than anything else you do, and will give you more flexibility than just having a fast/faster lens; even a very fast lens doesn't do well when it's really dark, plus a fast lens can't make up for bad light where the shadows on people's faces are too dark or in the wrong places.
2) The 15-85 is a great all-purpose lens, and you won't lose a lot if you buy one now and sell when/if you eventually get a full frame camera.
3) The same goes for the 17-55, but it doesn't have the focal length range of the 15-85, so which do you need more, constant f/2.8 or focal length range?
4) The 24-105 is also a great all-purpose lens, but probably not wide enough on a crop sensor camera unless you never shoot really wide. The advice above to get it as a kit with a full frame when/if you go that route is good.