Canon 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 vs. Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5

I have been using a Sigma 17-70 on my 60D for a few years as my walk-around travel lens. However, in consideration of the excellent reviews on the Canon 15-85 (in conjunction with my improving skills), I am considering purchasing the Canon.

With that said .... is anyone aware of any head-to-head comparisons between the two lenses?

Thank you kindly.

Never used the Sigma 17-70, though I have used a couple of other Sigmas and been pleased with them, but the 15-85 is a stonking good lens, I've been well pleased with mine.

If you can stand to wait a little while longer, the new revised version of the sigma 17-70 is due to be released pretty soon.

I've owned both. Both excellent and sharp. 15-85 has better AF, wider range and stabilization. 17-70 has a slightly faster aperture and macro. It's a tough call. I think I got as many great shots on the 17-70 as I have the 15-85. I think for what I use it for (landscapes) the wide zoom of the 15-85 makes me a little bit happier. I'd say it's only about a half-step up from that 17-70, though, unless you really need IS.

The sad part is you'll barely net $200 selling your 17-70 and it's a great lens. What other lenses do you have? You might be happier using that money to get an additional lens or upgrading something else.

Have owned both as well and the 15-85 was my next lens after the 17-70 non OS. I personally have not once regretted the purchase of the 15-85 as it's my go to general purpose/landscape lens. I've owned it for a little more than 2.5 years. The key differences that I personally noticed in my unscientific comparison:

• Very fast and reliable USM autofoucs on the 15-85
  
• Canon has the IS but Sigma is slightly faster aperture
  
• Sigma non-OS has much closer MFD
  
• The Canon is sharp wide open, the Sigma needed to be stopped down to get the best out of it.
  
• I thought colors/contrast are better with the Canon
  
• 15mm vs 17mm is a noticeable difference on the wide end.

shaneotool wrote in post #15432493
If you can stand to wait a little while longer, the new revised version of the sigma 17-70 is due to be released pretty soon.

Isn't it already out? 17-70 2.8-4.0 Macro

ct1co2 wrote in post #15432649
Have owned both as well and the 15-85 was my next lens after the 17-70 non OS. I personally have not once regretted the purchase of the 15-85 as it's my go to general purpose/landscape lens. I've owned it for a little more than 2.5 years. The key differences that I personally noticed in my unscientific comparison:

• Very fast and reliable USM autofoucs on the 15-85
  
• Canon has the IS but Sigma is slightly faster aperture
  
• Sigma has much closer MFD
  
• The Canon is sharp wide open, the Sigma needed to be stopped down to get the best out of it.
  
• I thought colors/contrast are better with the Canon
  
• 15mm vs 17mm is a noticeable difference on the wide end.

That said, and as Taylor pointed out, resale on the 17-70 is quite low, although I think it would be a real bargain for someone wanting to step up from the 18-55, but not having the money for something more costly. You need to ask yourself though if the approx $350 premium (for a used 15-85) is worth it for the (IMO) net gains that can be realized.

Not a fare comparison. You are talking about the older, non-OS version of the Sigma 17-70. The OS version is much improved.

Lbsimon wrote in post #15432744
Not a fare comparison. You are talking about the older, non-OS version of the Sigma 17-70. The OS version is much improved.

The OP asked for comparison of the 15-85 against the non-OS version of the 17-70, so how is my response not fair if I have direct experience with both?

Edit: I went back and specifically added "non-OS" where applicable to my response, even though it's not really necessary as the non-OS micro-motor focus Sigma is the 2.8-4.5 (clearly indicated in the title) which is what the OP refers to, whereas the OS is a 2.8-4.0 HSM, which is not mentioned.

You need to find this guy kfreels. He is the indisputable expert of comparing the 17-70 vs the 15-85. He posts in the 17-70 thread fairly often.

Thank you, all, for the responses. Currently my range of focal lengths is well-covered for my purposes. On the wide end, I have the Canon 10-22mm. Beyond 70mm, I have the Canon 70-300mm. Toss in a couple of prime lens for portrait & macro duties & I am quite pleased as far as my interests are concerned.

I guess that I am ready to upgrade for better IQ with my walk-around lens. I am fortunate to be able to travel a lot. I am of the mindset (at least as far as international travel is concerned) that whatever I carry with me must fit in the overhead bin on the aircraft. As a result, a medium-angle telephoto zoom lens is my workhorse. For me, if the Canon 15-85 produces appreciably better IQ than the Sigma (all other factors being equal), the price is worth it.

But there is no rush. I can certainly wait until the new Sigma 17-70 is released. Any announced release date?

Again, thank you!

Lbsimon wrote in post #15432744
Not a fare comparison. You are talking about the older, non-OS version of the Sigma 17-70. The OS version is much improved.

The OS version actually has worse optics, so I don't know if I can call it "much improved".

Candlesmon wrote in post #15432700
Isn't it already out? 17-70 2.8-4.0 Macro

There is a new version of this in the works with slightly different optics and a new exterior. It goes with Sigmas new contemporary, art, sports lens themes.

shaneotool wrote in post #15433076
There is a new version of this in the works with slightly different optics and a new exterior. It goes with Sigmas new contemporary, art, sports lens themes.

Does different mean better? Any word on pricing?

I can't give a true head-to-head on the older Sigma and the Canon but can tell you that having got the new OS 17-70, I gave the 15-85 to my daughter as to me, the Sigma gave better results on my 7D.

tkbslc wrote in post #15432997
The OS version actually has worse optics, so I don't know if I can call it "much improved".

I have the original, non-OS version and the current OS version and I will tell you that the OS version is sharper, more contrasty and focuses faster. Oh, and it has OS.

Tim