Which option? 17-55 2.8 vs 15-85 + 85 1.8

lazer-jock wrote in post #9583292
I just noticed that you have the 17-55 for sale in your sig. What happened to the love?

Well, I do love it. But I upgraded to FF with 24-105 kit lens. Have to sell 17-55 to get a UWA.

17-55 f2.8 and 85 f1.8 make a nice pair on crop.

ggweci wrote in post #9460777
... I'd like something with either more range or speed...

So has speed or range caused you more problems with your kit lens? That will answer your question.

BTW, I love the 17-55.

17-55 f/2.8 + 100 f/2.0 ftw
This is the poor mans 24-70 L, 135 L equivalent on FF

The 85mm is 136mm fov on a 1.6x crop . The 100 is 160.

midnight_rider wrote in post #9586138
The 85mm is 136mm fov on a 1.6x crop . The 100 is 160.

Right, technically a better match would be 17-40 and 85mm. But I had the 85mm and found it too close to 55mm (on my 17-55) for my liking.

The 17-55 and 100mm is a nice combo

KenjiS wrote in post #9470873
I was NEVER satisfied with the length of the 17-55...

This is why I like the Tamron 28-75... sometimes even more than the Canon 17-55.

SoundsGood wrote in post #9636327
This is why I like the Tamron 28-75... sometimes even more than the Canon 17-55.

I was never satisfied with the AF and lack of IS on it since with what that focal range and type of lens is used for in my instance, i am not shooting f/2.8...

Then in a complete contradiction i also miss having f/2.8 sometimes, But not for stopping action, Just the blur...

But then again, id also rather have an f/1.4 prime instead