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

Just picked it up this afternoon and only had time for a couple of shots. Think I'm going to like it a lot.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

BlueDemon wrote in post #13821732

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/51856661@N06/6​814722133/
165e by Botman7390, on Flickr

What flavor Les Paul?

guitarfish wrote in post #13822487
What flavor Les Paul?

Its an Epiphone version if I remember correctly.

2cruise wrote in post #13821434
Just picked it up this afternoon and only had time for a couple of shots. Think I'm going to like it a lot.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Looks like a couple % of barrel-distortion. Now, shoot a real pic.

I'm definitely still learning, but here's a few from my daily hikes near my house in South Korea.


C&C most CERTAINLY welcome...

Nothing was straight on this old shed.

1Tanker wrote in post #13822990
Looks like a couple % of barrel-distortion. Now, shoot a real pic.

Crumby mason...

Some shot of Rome under the snow!

Unfortunately this lens has a disadvantage. If i know what i will shoot that day i take the appropriate lens, like i have a wide angle and instead of 15 mm i use it, if i need close up shots i use 55-250, and if it's indoors nifty fifty is highly preferable. 15-85 is most times helps me when i don't know what to shoot and go out for taking photos with one lens.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/71418423@N06/6​799610101/

Just sold this lens to a fellow POTN member - I will miss this lens, It was a beauty. But I will still follow this thread and see what everyone else is doing with it.

HAPPY SHOOTING!

Question and some advice

Folks,
Can I ask how much post processing you are all doing on images taken with this lens? I find that for close up portraits, I need to do nothing in terms of noise reduction and sharpening when the person is up to 10-15 feet away. The images are crystal clear. However, when I photograph buildings, landscapes, cars, or flowers/trees in a distance (let's say 50-60 feet away) I find that the images have a fine grain quality to them when zoomed 1:1 in Lightroom3. This is for raw images. As a result, I end up applying a modest amount of noise reduction and the standard amount of sharpening for landscapes from the Lightroom3 preset.

Can I please ask what your experience has been? Am I experiencing the reality that DSLR raw images always need some fine tuning? I have tried shooting RAW+JPEG and the images are pretty sharp but rather crunchy (although even that depends on the amount of sharpening applied).

Many thanks,
Dimitri

DimitriNYC wrote in post #13834002
Folks,
Can I ask how much post processing you are all doing on images taken with this lens? I find that for close up portraits, I need to do nothing in terms of noise reduction and sharpening when the person is up to 10-15 feet away. The images are crystal clear. However, when I photograph buildings, landscapes, cars, or flowers/trees in a distance (let's say 50-60 feet away) I find that the images have a fine grain quality to them when zoomed 1:1 in Lightroom3. This is for raw images. As a result, I end up applying a modest amount of noise reduction and the standard amount of sharpening for landscapes from the Lightroom3 preset.

Can I please ask what your experience has been? Am I experiencing the reality that DSLR raw images always need some fine tuning? I have tried shooting RAW+JPEG and the images are pretty sharp but rather crunchy (although even that depends on the amount of sharpening applied).

Many thanks,
Dimitri

What camera, what ISO, what shooting conditions, what post processing software? Underexposed images will usually have some noise, which can also vary with ISO. Also, RAW images typically do need post processing adjustments to look their best, including sharpening, but sharpening will also tend to make existing image noise more visible. Do you use the "expose to the right" exposure technique - if you do, that will minimize noise at most ISO settings.

stsva,
The camera is a 60D and the iso range I have used for landscapes or cars is no more than 400 under sunny or partly cloudy conditions. I do not use the expose to the right approach.

I understand that RAW images need some processing, and I think that has been my main problem, I am slightly embarrassed to say that I was expecting the images to be perfect (which clearly cannot be for objects in the distance). The sharpening I apply is minimal (i think), I use either the faces or landscape preset in Lightroom 3. I am also aware of the crunchy effect that can occur when oversharpening. I am a little ways away from coming to grips with expose to the right, I need to practice more.

On Flickr I have searched the 15-85 thread for landscape images at full resolution (1:1) and some do look like my images, however, it is difficult to discern if the user has processed them at all or whether they are straight out of the camera.

In end, I think I was expecting miracles, which I actually did get. The autofocus is lightning fast, initially I could not believe how fast the lens focused compared to the 18-135, in addition, I did back to back testing and realized that the 15-85 would have no problem focusing where the 18-135 somewhat hunted. And did I say it was very quiet?

Many thanks,
Dimitri

stsva wrote in post #13834285
What camera, what ISO, what shooting conditions, what post processing software? Underexposed images will usually have some noise, which can also vary with ISO. Also, RAW images typically do need post processing adjustments to look their best, including sharpening, but sharpening will also tend to make existing image noise more visible. Do you use the "expose to the right" exposure technique - if you do, that will minimize noise at most ISO settings.