I have owned 2 copies of the 15-85 and both didn't creep and were sharp wide open at all FL. As far as distortion and vignetting goes that is easily corrected in post.
Great range and I wouldn't be selling mine if I still had a 1.6x camera. Every bit as good as my 24-105.
Well, not surprisingly, there are fans of both lenses. I think I'll run down to Showcase Photo and give this lens a try and see how I find the barrel distortion and vignetting. I appreciate all of the opinions here and I think I am pretty clear as to the pros and cons of each lens now.
Owned both of these lenses. I would probably opt for the Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS if it were me. I have since gone all full frame, so no more crop only lenses in my collection.
I recommend reading this review. It corresponds to the results I have found on the 15-85 IS, which is that it is an outstanding lens, superior IQ to the 17-50 Tamron. It is one of the best Canon lenses I've ever used, and distortion and vignetting are easily corrected in PP. The complete article is very informative.
I've had both. And as others have said, it really depends on what you want. When I had the Tammy, I liked the 2.8 and the sharpness. However, I didn't like the AF and the range. So I looked into the Canon 15-85mm. It has its ups and downs, just like any other lens. Sure, it's slow to really slow when you compare to the constant 2.8. But I really loved the IS, USM, and range. I was not bothered much by things like vignetting and barrel distortion for my shooting. I really liked the wide angle side, 15mm 3.5 with IS vs 17mm 2.8 without, I took the 15mm. Of course, I made this decision when the Tamron VC was in the $600 range, now you can find it for a lot less and that adds to the trouble of your decision.
Both (3?) lenses are fantastic for the price and have fans throughout. The reason you're having such a hard time is, they're all good and you can't really go wrong (price/performance wise). You really have to decide what's better for you.
Also, I found 2.8 to not be fast enough indoors anyways, so I bought the Sigma 30mm 1.4 and love that lens as well.
Gunzorro wrote:
I recommend reading this review. It corresponds to the results I have found on the 15-85 IS, which is that it is an outstanding lens, superior IQ to the 17-50 Tamron. It is one of the best Canon lenses I've ever used, and distortion and vignetting are easily corrected in PP. The complete article is very informative.
In fairness sites like this are subject o as much copy variation as we are. Tdp loved the 15-85 and clearly had a horrible copy of the sigma...the opposite of my experience.
Yeah, it was a frustrating one, but most likely a dud. Too many people have great things to say about it. I sent it back to canon and they said it was "within factory parameters" I disclosed my issues with it and ended up selling it. It's funny how one bad experience with something can taint your whole outlook.
surf monkey wrote:
Fair enough. You're entitled to your opinion and others can disagree, but you shouldn't get flamed for your honest comments. Like I said I've never owned the 15-85, my comments were in regards to the OP's initial take on what he wanted and didn't want, mostly in regards to not needing a fast aperture and wanting the bigger focal range.
