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

DimitriNYC wrote in post #13834474
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

I agree - I think the 15-85 is a fantastic lens. Take a look here http://daystarvisions.​com/Docs/Tuts/DCExp/pg​1.html for a really easy way to do expose to the right (even though he doesn't mention that term in the article, in effect what he does is the same thing). Once you calculate the exposure "headroom" you have for your camera, spot meter (or partial if the 60D doesn't have spot) on the brightest area of the scene in which you want to retain highlight detail, adjust the exposure upward by the number of stops/partial stops you've determined is the exposure headroom for your camera, and you're exposing to the right. Adjust the exposure downward in post processing if needed.

stsva,
Many thanks for the link, the articles look interesting. I have to say, I had no idea what I was getting into with the DSLR. My initial thought, and the reason from swapping the 18-135 for the 15-85, was to have a better camera (however one defines that) from the Panasonic LX3, with one lens to carry with me everywhere. What I did not think of was that once I got the camera, I thought that the EF 35mm f/2 was really necessary (it is when the kids are not very active in the house), and then the 430EX II was also necessary (it is, when taking group photos in the house) and then the RC-6 remote control was useful (it is when we go to the Bronx Botanical Garden and need to take photos of the family), and then a new strap was useful to have a more comfortable experience.

At the end of the day, I wish I could buy some free time to spend learning photography techniques better and doing post processing (when necessary, I like using LR3 instead of Photoshop, but that is just me). As things stand now, I take photos, look them over for a few minutes at 11 at night when the kids are asleep, print some for my folks and then go to sleep, all the while reading any articles I can on techniques. I always tell myself that one of these days things will change.

Thank you again for the link and for the feedback.

Kind regards,
Dimitri

stsva wrote in post #13834783
I agree - I think the 15-85 is a fantastic lens. Take a look here http://daystarvisions.​com/Docs/Tuts/DCExp/pg​1.html for a really easy way to do expose to the right (even though he doesn't mention that term in the article, in effect what he does is the same thing). Once you calculate the exposure "headroom" you have for your camera, spot meter (or partial if the 60D doesn't have spot) on the brightest area of the scene in which you want to retain highlight detail, adjust the exposure upward by the number of stops/partial stops you've determined is the exposure headroom for your camera, and you're exposing to the right. Adjust the exposure downward in post processing if needed.

DimitriNYC wrote in post #13835742
stsva,
My initial thought, and the reason from swapping the 18-135 for the 15-85, was to have a better camera
Dimitri

I'm thinking of making the same change, swapping the 18-135 for the 15-85. Was there a noticeable difference in IQ?

Mike

MikeDee wrote in post #13835995
I'm thinking of making the same change, swapping the 18-135 for the 15-85. Was there a noticeable difference in IQ?

Mike

The 15-85 is a much better lens; take a look here http://the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 for direct comparison images; the top part of the samples shows the center of the target and the bottom part shows the edge.

Robinson Crusoe wrote in post #13833692
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

That's why we call it a "walk-around" lens. It's better at that on my 7D than the 24-105 is on my 5D.

Hello 15-85 users! I'm loving the pictures from this lens and I was thinking about getting one for my wife. My wife often feels that she needs a wider lens (she currently shoots a 18-55 IS on a T1i) but I feel that she would be inconvenienced by the need to switch lenses - plus, she can get pretty clumsy at times. Do most of you find the need to go wider than the 15mm limit?

Photo_Rebel wrote in post #13855217
Hello 15-85 users! I'm loving the pictures from this lens and I was thinking about getting one for my wife. My wife often feels that she needs a wider lens (she currently shoots a 18-55 IS on a T1i) but I feel that she would be inconvenienced by the need to switch lenses - plus, she can get pretty clumsy at times. Do most of you find the need to go wider than the 15mm limit?

I have the Sigma 10-20mm if I need to go wider, but it's rare that I "need" that. It's more for creative shots or special circumstances. I must say I don't switch lenses very much once I got the 15-85mm. Unless I'm shooting wildlife, then I'll use the 55-250mm.

Photo_Rebel wrote in post #13855217
Hello 15-85 users! I'm loving the pictures from this lens and I was thinking about getting one for my wife. My wife often feels that she needs a wider lens (she currently shoots a 18-55 IS on a T1i) but I feel that she would be inconvenienced by the need to switch lenses - plus, she can get pretty clumsy at times. Do most of you find the need to go wider than the 15mm limit?

I have the 10-22 but reserve it for landscape and specialty shots. I find that wider than 15mm you start getting distortion which is not good on people shots. 15-85 has been my all-around go to lens since I got it and find I rarely use my other lenses in that range now.

15 on a crop is equivalent to 24 on FF, and has always been regarded as the widest you can go without getting "wide angle" distortion. Your wife's 18 is roughly 28FF, and traditionally was the standard wide angle prime used before zooms became so popular. I remember the transition from 28 to 24 - much more care was needed with verticals to avoid a picture looking screwy.

Wider than 15/24 is getting into "special effects" territory, and it's quite rare that I go wider than that for normal purposes. I have a 12-24 zoom lens which I use on FF, equivalent to an 8-16 on crop, but avoiding disturbing distortion with it is difficult. I suggest the 15-85 will be an excellent choice for now, and if later she wants to explore the really wide angle world you could get her a Sigma 8-16 zoom.

An irrelevant aside - I recently used a 55-250 when a friend used my 100-400, and I was very agreeably surprised at its performance and quality, and of course it's very pleasantly small and light. Given its modest cost I would say it is a "must have" for a crop camera.

Thank you for the inputs so far! I think that she likes the images that she sees when I shoot with my 16-35, which entices her to want a UWA. At the same time, however, she would also like to have a bit more reach than the 55 at the long end. I thought that this lens would be the perfect compromise since, as I've said, she would probably not want to constantly changes lenses. I would horrified to see her drop a $400 UWA! I think that if she gets this lens that might be satisfied with the upgrade from her 18-55. Thank you, all, once again!

Photo_Rebel wrote in post #13855729
I would horrified to see her drop a $400 UWA!

This lens costs a lot more than $400!

peterbj7 wrote in post #13855744
This lens costs a lot more than $400!

LOL - trust me, I know! If she gets this lens, it's staying on her T1i 99% of the time. Thanks again for your input.

Was testing my new lens and happened to notice something out of place while my wife was making dinner... really liking this lens thus far!

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

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

From this morning just outside my neighborhood. 11 degrees, flat light, and a light dusting of snow. Perfect.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.stevemokanp​hotography.com …098258&k=tmqfD4​Z&lb=1&s=A