Is 15-85IS much of an upgrade from 18-55IS?

I was just wondering If theres much of a difference between the 2 lenses other than the focal length?
I have the 10-22 as well, but find I really don't use it that much, even though its an excellent lens. I also wonder if The 15-85 is as good as the 10-22 as well?

the 15-85 is sharper, quicker focussing but larger than the 18-55. Also marginally better built.

Cracking lens, sits on my 7D all the time unless I'm shooting birds

yeah, mine shares time on my 40D with my 150/2.8 Sigma. hardly use any other lenses on that body these days

My personal experience is that yes, it's a worthy upgrade. I went 18-55is, to Sigma 17-70 non OS, to 15-85 and very happy with it for the last 2.5 years. The focus on the 15-85 is also quite a bit faster than the kit lens.

There is also an instant rebate now on the 15-85

The build on the 15-85 is a lot better and feels more solid then the 18-55. (it is a lot heavier)
I find it marginally sharper in the center and better in the corners and also a much better color contrast. It also focuses much quicker and better in low light. (and quieter)

Its a lot wider and longer. Unless you are really into ultra wide you will likely be fine with 15mm.
At 85 on the long end you tend not to want to switch much to your telephoto unless you really need the reach.

smythie wrote in post #15134075
the 15-85 is sharper, quicker focussing but larger than the 18-55. Also marginally better built.

+1. Very good explained, I also add the increment of range, the 15mm are close to wide angle and 85mm are a decent telephoto.

The only lacks of this lens are the poor luminosity at 85mm (only 5.6) and the vignetting at 15mm.

Just the extra 30mm on the long side would be a big + making this into a pretty neat walk around lens.

I use the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS on a pair of 1.6x cameras but, if I were to be shooting with a single camera, I would probably equip it with the 15-85mm lens for general walk-around shooting!

15-85 is about the same quality as the 10-22. It's a very high caliber lens.

Way better lens.
USM, quiet focus, faster focus, wider and longer, a lot sharper than my old kit lens.

Now is it better than the 18-55 2.8?
I used to have the Tamron 17-50 2.8, and miss the constant aperture and the sharpness. Dont miss the slow and noisy AF though.

`AQAWswswswswswswswsws

I just bought the 15-85 to replace my 18-135 (old version). It is a much nicer lens. Sharper wide open. Sharper in the corners. Like the 18-55 and 18-135 it distorts heavily at it widest setting. At 18mm there is no noticeable distortion. It also has FTM available. I don't use FTM, but I am sure some do. I was very surprised to find a huge difference between 15mm and 18mm, and not so much difference between 85 and 135mm. This means I gain a lot on the wide end, and give up very little on the long end.

I considered the 17-55 but find it expensive and the range too limiting. I'll stick to my fast primes, if I need f/2.8 in that range.

smythie wrote in post #15134075
the 15-85 is sharper, quicker focussing but larger than the 18-55. Also marginally better built.

In my opinion, the difference in the build is not marginal.

The 18-55 IS was an excellent lens on my past XSi. My copy of the 15-85 IS on my current 60D is a bit sharper(especially stopped down on the wide end) but not a night and day difference. The biggest advantage IMO of the 15-85 is the zoom range. The disadvantage is the price

Wider angle + farther reach + USM. so yes, it is worth it. I really like the wide-ish angle capabilites of this lens. Unfortauntely has variable aperture, but its a general use lens for me. Way better than the kit lens.