Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 03 Jun 2010 (Thursday) 21:02
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EFS 17-55 vs EFS 15-85

 
marivil
Senior Member
Avatar
327 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2008
     
Jun 03, 2010 21:02 |  #1

Has anyone used both and can give a comparison? I have owned the 17-55 but I always found the reach wasn't quite enough and I didn't care for the plastic feel . The difference between f2.8 and f3.5 doesn't matter that much to me as I have other lens to cover the lower f stop.

thanks..
Gene


-Gene-
Always looking forward to my next shoot.
Gear- Canon Bodies- 5D Mark II , 50D both gripped -- Lens - 300L F.28 IS, 70-200L F2.8 IS II, 24-105L IS and a 35L F1.4. , WHAT'S NEXT
?
2x & 1.4 Extender - 580 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Tony_Stark
Shellhead
Avatar
4,287 posts
Likes: 345
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Jun 03, 2010 21:18 |  #2

I too would be interested. Im keeping away from the 17-55 due to cost and lack of reach (same as kit lens). The 15 for me as it provides a decent wide angle and decent reach as a well packaged walkaround lens.


Nikon D810 | 24-70/2.8G | 58/1.4G
EOS M | 22 f/2 STM

Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Stone ­ 13
Goldmember
Avatar
1,690 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Huntersville, NC
     
Jun 03, 2010 21:29 |  #3

There are several recent threads on this, but I shot with both and ended up buying the 15-85. The image quality is a wash, they are both excellent and neither outshines the other at any focal length. Having the extra reach is very nice and the extra 2mm on the wide end is alot more significant than you might think. The 15-85 has 4 stop IS, i've been able handhold at some ridiculously slow shutter speeds, the 15-85 is also alot better built. I have primes when I want to play with DOF or shoot in really low light so the 15-85 was a no brainer @ $620. Even so, the 17-55 is an amazing lens and I would not hesitate to buy it if I needed the speed.


Ken
Fujifilm X100T | 5D III gripped |35L | 24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 85 1.8 | 430 EX II | Yongnuo YN-568EX | Billingham 445 | Think Tank UD 60 |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
paradiddleluke
Goldmember
Avatar
3,594 posts
Likes: 42
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Chicago, Illinois
     
Jun 03, 2010 21:42 |  #4

haven't tried the 17-55 but I love my 15-85 to death! very well built, excellent range, 15 is really nice and if you plan your shot you can get pretty nice Bokeh at the 85 end! both lenses will give you great quality


Website (external link) | Chicago Actor Headshots (external link) | Gear | Flickr (external link) | Blog (external link) | 500px (external link) | Youtube (external link) | Facebook (external link)
- Luke S -

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
marivil
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
327 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2008
     
Jun 03, 2010 21:50 |  #5

Thanks Tony and Ken...
I had the 10-22 and loved it (similar price). I would be nice to get closer to the cropped wide angle with the added reach. I have been juggling lens around the past month. Now I am trying for a lens combo suitable for the full frame and crop. I may still add the 55-250 for the crop.
The ultimate goal would be to have all widths and as varied f stops as I can for both bodies. Using a second shooter.


-Gene-
Always looking forward to my next shoot.
Gear- Canon Bodies- 5D Mark II , 50D both gripped -- Lens - 300L F.28 IS, 70-200L F2.8 IS II, 24-105L IS and a 35L F1.4. , WHAT'S NEXT
?
2x & 1.4 Extender - 580 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
akadmon
Member
Avatar
221 posts
Likes: 49
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Massachusetts
     
Jun 03, 2010 22:20 as a reply to  @ marivil's post |  #6

Why on earth did you get rid of the 10-22?! It's ridiculously sharp all the way across, so much so that crops from shots taken with it look as good or better than shots taken at 50-85 mm on my zoom lenses (18-55 IS and 55-250 IS). On top of that I've taken some truly incredible shots at 10 mm with it. The 10-22 and my new 100L IS are practically the only lenses I use these days.


100% Canon!!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rudyr
Member
63 posts
Joined Oct 2009
     
Jun 04, 2010 12:04 |  #7

I debated whether the price premium of the 15-85 was 'worth' it (~600 w/ the rebate pricing). I know I was happy with the overall sharpness and contrast vs. the 18-135 it replaced. I really like being able to go to 15mm for wide shots w/o changing lenses. The overall build quality and IS is nice. For low light, DOF priority situations I supplement it with a 28/1.8. The pairing of the two works for me because the wide-side and a bit more length was a higher priority vs. 2.8 speed; the latter of which I felt could be mitigated with a small prime.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jurgenph
Member
231 posts
Joined Apr 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Jun 04, 2010 12:46 |  #8

well, i owned a 17-55 f/2.8 for about two years, and recently got myself a 15-85. the little extra reach on both ends was something i seemed to use more than the constant f/2.8.
i usually shoot in AV @ f/5.6 anyway

in the mean time, i have sold the 17-55

image quality is great on both lenses. the only thing that i notice is more vignetting on the 15-85 across the focal length. but it's a simple fix in post processing, if it bothers you.

the 15-85 is still very usable in low light (museums etc... where the objects are not moving), the IS really works very well.

also, 72mm filters are cheaper than 77mm filters ;)


J.


40D, 15-85mm IS, 70-200mm f/4L IS, 50mm f/1.8II, 430exII, kenko 1.4tc

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
robbykh
Member
218 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Glendale, CA
     
Jun 04, 2010 13:13 as a reply to  @ jurgenph's post |  #9

I also own the 15-85 and very happy with it.

I just came from a Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4, had it for a day and returned it next day. Not happy at all.

I wish I had pics here with me - I'm at work - to post and show you how sharp the 15-85 is. For low light shooting Dinner/Indoors/Night Time I supplement my 15-85 with my 430EX or when I feel really picky then I swith to the nifty fifty.

Going back to the 15-85, it's a nice lens. In the beginning I thought $620 plus the cost of the lens hood - it doesn't come with one, has to be purchased separately, HIGHLY recommended - was a little too much. Once I saw the quality of the pics I felt much better knowing the lens fills my photography needs.
This lens is glued to my camera as my primary walk around lens, then for my zoom needs I use my 55-250IS also a nice lens.

You are not going to regret it if you decide to purchase this lens.


Canon Rebel T1i ; EFS 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM ; EFS 18-55mm IS ; EFS 55-250mm IS; Speedlight 430EXII.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
10,247 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philly 'burbs
     
Jun 04, 2010 13:25 |  #10

marivil wrote in post #10298923 (external link)
Has The difference between f2.8 and f3.5 doesn't matter that much to me

The 15-85 is only f/3.5 at the wide end. It eventually ends up at f/5.6....

I have its "older brother" the 17-85, and it's an ok lens for quick snapshots.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DL ­ Photo
Senior Member
577 posts
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Richmond, BC, Canada
     
Jun 04, 2010 13:50 as a reply to  @ robbykh's post |  #11

I have ordered the 15-85 and it arrives on Monday. I'll post some sample pics.

I did a lot of research as well....and even tried the Tammy 17-50. The Canon 17-55 was going to be my first choice but just too much extra money over the 15-85. I also like the idea of the extra zoom.

This board is fantastic. I will not purchase another item before doing my homework here.


G16
OMD-10 (absolutely love this little devil)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
probe1957
Member
Avatar
107 posts
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Central IL
     
Jun 04, 2010 14:19 |  #12

robbykh wrote in post #10302695 (external link)
Going back to the 15-85, it's a nice lens. In the beginning I thought $620 plus the cost of the lens hood - it doesn't come with one, has to be purchased separately, HIGHLY recommended - was a little too much.

Cry me a river. I paid $720 + hood for mine. ;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Heavy ­ Smiles
Member
170 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Jun 04, 2010 14:45 |  #13
bannedPermanent ban

f/5.6 at 85mm. no constant aperture... I don't know if Ide pay $620 for that :confused: but then, it's just me..


Canon T2i, 24-70L, 100 2.8 Macro, 50 1.8, 55-250 EFS, 18-55 EFS, Sigma 50 1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RetroBlader
Senior Member
Avatar
863 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
     
Jun 04, 2010 22:27 |  #14

marivil wrote in post #10298923 (external link)
Has anyone used both and can give a comparison? I have owned the 17-55 but I always found the reach wasn't quite enough and I didn't care for the plastic feel . The difference between f2.8 and f3.5 doesn't matter that much to me as I have other lens to cover the lower f stop.

The 15-85 "gets slow" very fast -- F3.5 at 15mm but already F4.0 by 17mm, F4.5 barely past 28mm, F5.0 barely past 35mm, and F5.6 from about 60mm all the way to 85mm.

So it may be F2.8 vs F3.5 at the wide end (if you want to be strict, at 17mm it's actually F2.8 vs F4.0), but almost 2 stops of difference at 55mm.

However, you sound like you've already made up your mind but just want to hear a bunch of people agreeing with you....


:cool:


Above water: 7D | 400D | 10-22 | 17-55IS | 15-85IS | 85/1.8 | 100L IS | 70-200/4L IS | 70-300IS | 100-400L | 580EX II
Underwater: S95 + WP-DC38 + dual dive lights | Olympus OM-D E-M5 (await housing)
Full Gear List
Need/Want: More time for photography (And some talent would be nice.... :lol:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HKGuns
Goldmember
Avatar
1,469 posts
Joined May 2008
     
Jun 04, 2010 23:11 |  #15

The constant, fast aperture of the 17-55 is worth every penny in my mind. I don't see it as a very close contest in my mind. Depending on your body and your use, you'll get images with the 17-55 that you simply couldn't with a slower, variable aperture lens like the 15-85mm. But I'm biased because I loved my 17-55 before moving to 1.3X and having to give it up.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,637 views & 0 likes for this thread
EFS 17-55 vs EFS 15-85
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is brservices
1058 guests, 357 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.