Official: EF-S 15-85 mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

The MTF of this lens looks very impressive. I would spend the $800 if it's at least f/4. Anyways, I'll wait for the hands-on reviews.

does it mean the 17-85 is gone?!

omer wrote in post #8565526
does it mean the 17-85 is gone?!

I would assume so.

I hope it has less distortion at 15mm than the 17-85 does at 17mm. The focal lenght is almost exactly what I have been wanting for walk around EF-S lens. The 17-85 is nice but the barrel distortion is way to much and the image quality is just so so.

If this has low barrel distortion good sharpness throughout the range I will be very tempted to pick it up as a walk around lens if the price comes down to say $400-500.

At $800 I would rather get a 17-55 f2.8 IS for a little bit more or save some money and look at Sigma/Tamron alternatives.

mrfixitx wrote in post #8566018
I hope it has less distortion at 15mm than the 17-85 does at 17mm. The focal lenght is almost exactly what I have been wanting for walk around EF-S lens. The 17-85 is nice but the barrel distortion is way to much and the image quality is just so so.

If this has low barrel distortion good sharpness throughout the range I will be very tempted to pick it up as a walk around lens if the price comes down to say $400-500.

At $800 I would rather get a 17-55 f2.8 IS for a little bit more or save some money and look at Sigma/Tamron alternatives.

What Sigma/Tamron alternatives?

Thats my problem, There are none, At all, not one thats wider than a 28mm equivalent that goes to a 105 or 135 equivalent with an image stabilizer...

And have a ring-type USM drive on top of it...

It's a big sized lens for a EF-S. Just look at the 72mm filter size. The width is pretty much the same throughout. Guess i'll just have to wait for the reviews.. A $500-600 street price would be reasonable depending on the quality of lens. Hopefully the distortion @ 15mm is good. Good range, Hopefully the quality is good.

I want the reviews to come out quick-smart.

I'm planning on buying a 17-55 IS during the month of October before heading overseas on a holiday. This is to replace my Sigma 17-70mm as a "walkaround" lens. I need to know if the 15-85 IS would be a better option.

I Like to Watch wrote in post #8566879
I want the reviews to come out quick-smart.

I'm planning on buying a 17-55 IS during the month of October before heading overseas on a holiday. This is to replace my Sigma 17-70mm as a "walkaround" lens. I need to know if the 15-85 IS would be a better option.

For me personally, I've tried this over and over again...

Fact is, I like a 24-100-something equivalent and dont like the 28-80 equivalents..

Fact, I've had about...I cant even COUNT the number of 28-80-class lenses and i've finally just got it, I dont like 28-80...I even had the "ultimate" 28-80 equivalent, the 17-55 IS and I admit its unbeatable indoors, but outdoors it left me rather...hmn...shall we say wanting on the long end...and even indoors i wish i had those extra 2mm on the wide end..

So in your case, I'd get the 15-85 to replace the Sigma 17-70....

Why? I've compared the wide ends and not much difference. Not in a sense it matters since you're nearing the UWA area. As for zoom...yeah, it does but still not much, which again I tested when I was curious about the 17-70 and if that extra 20 would matter from the 18-50 F2.8 I had. yeah, tried it...did nothing.

While it's preference, don't blatantly lie and make it to be something amazingly great. The FL isn't that big of difference and for price, gag me. Still, once again, I wouldn't drop new or most used prices for the 17-55. And over ratted high price lens. I've never needed USM/HSM for that FL (though I wouldn't mind it) and IS would be nice, but for the cost of $700 more than a Tamron/Sigma equiv, psh!

KenjiS wrote in post #8567144
So in your case, I'd get the 15-85 to replace the Sigma 17-70....

Not if the Image Quality is not as good as the 17-55 IS...so will wait and see the reviews. Perhaps I was a little "misleading" with my remark about "replacing" my Sigma 17-70....it would be to enhance the Sigma as I would still be hanging onto it as it takes some great shots.

What I would appreciate from the 17-55 IS (that the 15-85 IS won't achieve), is better capabilities for indoor/low-light shots.

KenjiS wrote in post #8566241
What Sigma/Tamron alternatives?

Thats my problem, There are none, At all, not one thats wider than a 28mm equivalent that goes to a 105 or 135 equivalent with an image stabilizer...

And have a ring-type USM drive on top of it...

True Tamron/Sigma dont offer any zooms that wide or any that go out to 85mm. I would however be willing to trade to a 28mm wide angle vs. 24mm if the price difference was substantial especially if at 15mm it is less than stellar.

I Like to Watch wrote in post #8568136
Not if the Image Quality is not as good as the 17-55 IS...so will wait and see the reviews. Perhaps I was a little "misleading" with my remark about "replacing" my Sigma 17-70....it would be to enhance the Sigma as I would still be hanging onto it as it takes some great shots.

What I would appreciate from the 17-55 IS (that the 15-85 IS won't achieve), is better capabilities for indoor/low-light shots.

If your primary focus for it is indoors and low light, The 17-55 IS is unbeatable

Sure the extra bit at the wide end is very nice for me [I'm a 24mm person..Heck my 10-20 goes to 15mm a lot honestly ] but the 17-55 is probubly the best normal indoor lens out there...

I've been wishing for this type of lens for a long time. My only concerns are (1) speed (it's not a constant f/4 like the 24-105), and (2) IQ (will it be compromised too much by the extreme 5.6x zoom range). Regarding the IQ, the big thing for me will be wide angle barrel distortion. If it is improved dramatically from the 17-85, I'm probably going to find a way to grab this, notwithstanding the high initial offering price. For me, this would be close to a one-lens solution.

http://www.dpnotes.com​/canon-15-85mm/

Theres 2 samples there at least...the rally car one looks spectacular though in need of a bit of USM

Interesting that Canon chose not to provide a full size sample of the shot at 15mm....